Been banned for AI-Slop on a few subs here on Lemmy as well as on Reddit.
I always provide a good amount of technical detail in my posts and i try to be as transparant and communicative about the details. My projects are very complicated and I try to document them well.
my project is pretty cryptography-heavy... the act of me sharing my efforts in an attempt to show transparency... but it is used against my project by calling it AI-slop (undermining Kerkhoff's principles).
It's 2026 and most developers are using AI. I have used it to create things like formal proof and verification.
my project is aimed to be a secure messaging app. i have all the bells-and-whistles there along with documentation.... but if the conversation cant move past "its AI-generated"... then it seems the cryptography/cybersecurity/privacy community isnt aligned with the fact that using AI is now common practice for developers of all levels.
AI is a tool. you cant (and shouldnt) "trust" AI to do anything without oversight. AI does not replace the due-diligence that has always been needed. i dont "trust" my hammer to bash in a nail... i "use" the hammer. AI is not different in how you need to be responsible for how its used.
i've busted my ass on my project for it to be called AI slop. i think its completely fine when it comes from folks in the community. cryptography is a serious subject and my ideas and implementation SHOULD/MUST be scrutinised... but its simply ignorant if mods are banning me for the quality of my work considering the the level of transparency and my engagement on discussions about it.
It's a bit reductive to call it slop. I think i try harder than most in providing links, code and documentation. Of course I used AI... and it's clearer for it. (you can find more detail on my profile)
i am of course sour from being banned, but am i wrong to think my code isnt AI slop? Some parts of my project are clearly lazy-ui... but im not sharing on some UI/UX/design sub. the cryptography module has unit tests and formal verification. if that is AI-slop and can result in me being banned, i simply dont have faith in that community to be objective on the reality of where AI can contribute.
while its understandable people dont want to review AI-slop... i think the cryptography/cybersecurity community needs to get on board with the idea of using AI to help in reviewing such code. am i wrong? is the future of cryptography is still people performing manual review of the breathtaking volumes of AI code?
Sorry, I'm a bit low on time right now, so I can't give it the attention it deserves. But from a quick glance... I like it. The user interface looks appealing and easy to understand. I didn't check if adding peers works on a tech level, but overall I think the design is right. It's probably straightforward enough for the average user to understand. I also like how there's links to documentation, explanations what it does and the ideas behind it. I think that's roughly what makes good software. Be genuine and honest to your userbase. Tell them what they can expect. Give them documentation to read more if they like. Otherwise make it as simple and straightforward as you can.
I mean I just thought I'd drop some ideas. Of course you do you. Seems you have a bigger vision. And we/I understand it's quite involved. You're doing a lot. All of that for some broader idea, and there's a lot of detail work to be done. I like talking about things like that and following what other people (who have some sort of vision) do. I see how it's a lot of work. And several things you're doing simultaneously.
thanks! feel free to share any ideas to discuss or reach out for clarity on details of mine.