so...they are manually re-setting the "interaction limits" over and over again, since they are only temporary?

why not use hooks to automatically reject issue comments / PRs etc. from users that didnt go through onboarding, rather than repurposing GH features that aren't really designed for that use (and are hence in danger of being changed someday)?

There's got to be a concept to differentiate the industry plants who start an "open source" project that has enough funding for a $900 bug bounty. They are speaking and developing in the language of corruption and they don't even know it. Of course you will receive AI bot spam, but unfortunately it will continue if you don't take a hard look in the mirror.

I don't understand how clicking "I agree" a few times will stop the AI bots?

The captcha - maybe.

Why does this company use the Slashdot logo?

See, this is an article that uses dashes correctly. It adds value, creates a bit of buildup

reindeer games

It's quite ironic to complain about AI slop in a piece that's quite clearly AI slop.

Soon there will be no more AI doomer comments. The bots will take over that job too.

---

I'm working for an open source company, and my God, are 95% of contributions useless.

There are really dumb ones where the bot writes 10 paragraphs about how he implemented the feature, but the entire changeset is adding one line to .gitignore or adding a CLAUDE.md file.

There are even worse ones where the bot submits 3000 lines of code that seemingly works, but you have to spend an hour to figure out why it doesn't work.

The dumb ones are so much better.

cool

Interesting

Musk before the verdict: "It's not okay to steal a charity"

Altman after the verdict: "It's okay to steal a charity"