Cara
brib 
Found out that the Slopfree Software Index recently reached 100 stars.
Which... wow, I never expected this level of Internet fame 
. Thank you everyone, for your support!
MaddieM4@brib what's your policy about inclusion of projects that aren't production-ready and don't have users yet? I have a few repos that are AI-free and will always be, but just need me to say so in the README. But I don't want that to add noise to the index.
@MaddieM4 I do ask for projects to have users before being added to the list... otherwise it would be too easy to fill up the list with projects that don't get used.
Doesn't need to be many though. There isn't a hard and fast line, but the smallest project I have has 53 users right now, and I think it had about 40 when I added it. I also have projects with ~10 stars on there
Aleksandr Koltsoff@brib It gives me hope! Thanks for your work!
I've also found slopscan tool quite useful for projects that aren't active enough to yet specify their policy ( https://slopscan.ava.pet/ )
juulcatI have been wondering whether to add Vivaldi or not.
My main concern is that it is harder to audit closed-source software, as I can't check commits or documentation for signs of slop. However, I generally don't see "claude" banners on projects banning AI, and even if I do there's usually a good reason for it (e.g. it slipped in without a maintainer noticing, and once it's there it's stuck there even if the maintainers undo the code).
So I think it does make sense to accept closed-source submissions. Feel free to send over any suggestions 🙂
@brib I'd like to put forward our commercial 3D art tool, Avoyd, @dougbinks and I develop and publish. We strictly refuse to use gen AI in any of our work or publications. Would a statement in our FAQ help?
Yeah, having something to link to would be very useful!
I've added your tool onto the list of things to add, will get to it sometime over the next few days
@brib fantastic, thank you for the list! Here is our statement: https://www.enkisoftware.com/faq#nogenAI
shonin@brib Excellent -- have added to this list https://manzokuan.blogspot.com/p/information-for-future-envirohealers.html
alanxoc3
Michael J. Gratton@brib Thanks for doing this work! Much appreciated! You got another star from me. :)
Cody Casterline 🏳️🌈Following this particular news trail far too closely for my own health, it seems to be a big reason for the rewrite.
I think the story is that first someone (can't remember if they were a bun dev or someone tied to Anthropic) tried to merge some slop-written changes to Zig, Zig pointed to the no-slop policy and that they wanted to implement these particular changes carefully (which slop doesn't do), and the Rust rewrite is basically a developer hissy fit.
It's a giant mess imho and a good reason to switch away from Bun
@brib Yikes. If you have links I'd love to read the details.
@NfNitLoop The Register seems to cover it, and the articles have links to the original social media/blogposts:
Chaz Haws@brib @NfNitLoop See also https://ziggit.dev/t/bun-s-zig-fork-got-4x-faster-compilation-times/15183/19?u=chaz, for details on the PR that Bun wanted to commit, it was just not good enough. Then I think some combination of “that hurt my feelings” and “Anthropic might not look good if we keep depending on a project that rejects Anthropic’s slop” led to this within like two weeks.
Bun’s Zig fork got 4x faster compilation times
AI is entirely besides the point here. The changes in this Zig fork are not desirable to upstream for several reasons. Parallel semantic analysis has been an explicitly planned feature of the Zig compiler for a long time, and it has heavily influenced the design of the self-hosted Zig compiler. However, implementing this feature correctly has implications not only for the compiler implementation, but for the Zig language itself! Therefore, to implement this feature without an avalanche of bugs ...
@chazh @NfNitLoop Yeah, that very much seems to be the case.
@cwebber has talked about this story too: https://social.coop/@cwebber/116522889714585276 . She mentions it also has a lot of value as an Anthropic marketing stunt
Christine Lemmer-Webber (@[email protected])
So the "Bun being a vibe coded rewrite from Zig to Rust" is a different story than I think it's being sold as, from everything I can see. It's worth seeing several events laid out back to back. - Zig has a no AI contributions policy. They've explained their rationale: https://kristoff.it/blog/contributor-poker-and-ai/ - Bun has a fork of Zig with AI generated changes. Zig's developers explain why they aren't merging them, and that they have their own path to relevant improvements https://ziggit.dev/t/bun-s-zig-fork-got-4x-faster-compilation-times/15183/19 - Anthropic acquires Bun https://www.anthropic.com/news/anthropic-acquires-bun-as-claude-code-reaches-usd1b-milestone - Bun is working on an experimental rewrite from Zig to Rust using Claude driven by the Bun lead, now working for Anthropic https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48016880 What does Bun's lead have to say about AIgen contributions to FOSS? > I expect OSS to go the opposite direction: no human contribution allowed. Slop will be a nostalgic relic of 2025 & 2026. https://xcancel.com/jarredsumner/status/2048434628248359284 What can we make of this?