News: 0183177448

  ARM Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

PlayStation3 Emulator Devs Politely Ask Contributors to Stop Submitting 'AI Slop' Pull Requests (kotaku.com)

(Sunday May 10, 2026 @11:34PM (EditorDavid) from the bad-vibes-coding dept.)


Open-source PS3 emulator RPCS3 "has been around since 2011," [1] Kotaku notes , and has made 70% of the PlayStation 3's library fully playable, "bolstered in part by the many users who contribute to its GitHub page." But their dev team "took to X today to very kindly and civilly request that users 'stop submitting AI slop code pull requests' to its GitHub page."

> Then they immediately proceeded to tell the AI-brain-rotted tech bros attempting to justify their vibe-coding nonsense to kick rocks in the replies, which is somewhat less civil but far more entertaining to read...

>

> My favorite one was when someone asked how the team was certain they weren't rejecting human-written code, to which RPCS3 [2]replied : "You can't possibly handwrite the type of shit AI slop we have been seeing."



[1] https://kotaku.com/playstation-3-emulator-devs-politely-ask-that-people-stop-flooding-it-with-ai-code-pull-requests-2000694656

[2] https://x.com/rpcs3/status/2053287528627929517?s=20



Idiots with computers (Score:2)

by gweihir ( 88907 )

Are still idiots. LLMs do not change that.

AI Slop (Score:2)

by phantomfive ( 622387 )

Note they didn't ask people to stop submitted AI code. They asked people to stop submitting AI slop.

Presumably if the code produced is high quality, they will be willing to accept it.

Re: (Score:1)

by Anonymous Coward

> Note they didn't ask people to stop submitted AI code. They asked people to stop submitting AI slop.

> Presumably if the code produced is high quality, they will be willing to accept it.

And that sounds pretty reasonable, TBH.

If the code is good, then we shouldn't care where it comes from.

Re: (Score:3)

by T34L ( 10503334 )

If AI produced high quality outputs, people wouldn't complain about AI use, because there would be no way to tell things are produced by AI. They complain because they can tell, because it's largely garbage.

I have been working extensively through Claude Code, with usage paid by my job, and if you want anything mildly serious that isn't just webapp slop reinventing the same onboarding page over and over, it it takes poring over pretty much every single thing it produces to make sure it didn't just fuck it al

Re: (Score:2)

by Luthair ( 847766 )

I also don't find it particularly useful, but I know others who claim it is. I think the problem is that people who don't really know what they're doing just paste errors into an LLM and open a PR with the output. If they knew what they were doing and reviewed it as you are then they probably wouldn't end up wasting the project's time.

aaaand now I'm curious (Score:2)

by mckwant ( 65143 )

Can we have examples of the AI slop that couldn't possibly be human created?

When it goes wrong, how bad can it get, and what's it trying to do?

Examples (Score:2)

by bjamesv ( 1528503 )

> Can we have examples of the AI slop that couldn't possibly be human created?

> When it goes wrong, how bad can it get, and what's it trying to do?

It's open source, just go look: [1]https://github.com/RPCS3/rpcs3... [github.com]

First example I found (Page 1) [2]https://github.com/RPCS3/rpcs3... [github.com]

Another one (Page 7) [3]https://github.com/RPCS3/rpcs3... [github.com]

[1] https://github.com/RPCS3/rpcs3/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed

[2] https://github.com/RPCS3/rpcs3/pull/18697/files

[3] https://github.com/RPCS3/rpcs3/pull/18352/files

Re: (Score:2)

by NobleNobbler ( 9626406 )

I think it's also strongly due to the process that AI PRs are being rejected. For one, they usually have:

Little utility

Overly invasive changes

Bloviated PR text that sounds legit but it absolutely full of shit and self-justifying

Outright lies on metrics or testing

And an author that feels offended you "caught them" and degenerates into just a huge name calling event or a "no I dint" "yes you did" "OK, I did a little" "No you did a lot" "OK, fine I did a lot but its still worthwhile" "No its not your patch to

Programming graffiti (Score:2)

by NotEmmanuelGoldstein ( 6423622 )

I can understand the people who generate AI slop to sell books and music but what's the point to generating AI code? It's like giving a paintbrush to a monkey and calling the monkey's owner, a great artist. This is graffiti, where 99% of 'artists' are really excusing their abuse of someone else's property (Notice: It's never their own.) with delusions of grandeur. Unfortunately, everyone else has to suffer.

Those who hate and fight must stop themselves -- otherwise it is not stopped.
-- Spock, "Day of the Dove", stardate unknown