So much AI, so many add-ons... and so many bugs

[Anthony Parsons]

Well... I was watching hype about GLM5.2, so I went and asked it a question. Just a couple of years out of date. First time using it, first question to test its accuracy.

 

[Digital Doctor]

From a site owner’s point of view, the difficult part is that you usually can’t fully review every add-on before installing it.

The addon makers could answer something like this:

 

[Mr Lucky]

The addon makers could answer something like this:
View attachment 347343

And you’d expect honest answers to question 3?

 

[Digital Doctor]

And you’d expect honest answers to question 3?

Not always

 

[Shortie861]

I have to admit, as much as I do like that we are seeing an influx of add-ons for XenForo, the fact that a lot of them are made using AI and it's obvious, and are released with so many bugs is a little worrying.

 

[Wildcat Media]

I have to admit, as much as I do like that we are seeing an influx of add-ons for XenForo, the fact that a lot of them are made using AI and it's obvious, and are released with so many bugs is a little worrying.

Any of these addons that are largely written with automated tools should declare that in their release notes. Including version compatibility and common items like that is already standard, there's just no mechanism for people to declare if something is AI built or not.

While I don't see XF's official Resources ever adopting it, I would suggest that any add-on using AI in any manner should be disclosed. That gives us the chance to avoid what could be potentially a sloppy and insecure add-on. If it's one of our long-time trusted developers who used it for some assistance, and they've reviewed the code, it's certainly better than this inrush of add-ons from developers who suddenly and recently surfaced after this forum has been around for at least 16 years.

I know some platforms are already requiring that disclosure (YouTube, etc.). It's not much of an ask to require that here as well.

 

[Anthony Parsons]

I don't think AI is the problem, just the code quality, which is the coder / owner of it. There have been plenty of crappy addons, before AI. Maybe addons need to go through a QA process before going live on first upload? A few volunteers who just manage that. Is the code up to spec on creation, or not? Updates are not vetted. You can even have a bypass for known users who only upload quality addons? You're really just trying to stop the resource directory becoming an AI slop repository, not banning AI itself... and one check on creation can do that, then let the person go wild.

 

[JamesBrown]

While I don't see XF's official Resources ever adopting it, I would suggest that any add-on using AI in any manner should be disclosed.

That crazy, I know plenty of talented software developers. I don't know any who don't use AI.

 

[Wildcat Media]

Many don't, either. I would trust existing, long-time XF add-on developers, though, as opposed to the newer slop from the unknowns.

 

[cdub]

XF should just offer a paid verification service where they will go through your code and verify it's good then you get a verified badge on the addon. Done.

The fees pay the person doing it.

 

[Anthony Parsons]

XF should just offer a paid verification service where they will go through your code and verify it's good then you get a verified badge on the addon.

That is a good revenue source for XF IMO.... it would relatively quick for them to go through addon code purely to assess a handful of factors. They aren't doing it for right or wrong way of coding, just if it works in XF and isn't go to break things.

 

[Digital Doctor]

Maybe addons need to go through a QA process before going live on first upload?

Obsidian.md has automated addon screening.