Ban AI Mod Development

[Micah Holmes]

Maybe a unpopular view but I think we need to ban AI mod development. I don't have a issue teaching those willing to learn how to make mods or write scripts for Vintage story. The fact of the matter is those who build mods with out using AI put a lot of effort into making mods and use our skills to make the game fun and safe for everyone. If your using AI to build a mod, you have no idea what that code will do or can do. I think its disrespectful to the mod community to allow AI code. I've spent over a year developing my mod. A lot of others on here have spent a lot of time as well building their mods. Honestly some of the best mods on here come from people far more skilled than my self. Some of the model making and animation for these mods is beautiful. Its literally art in motion. We need to protect this community in my opinion from AI/unsafe mods-code development. Someone tell me i'm wrong and i'm just a cranky old man. Blows my mind seeing all this AI created mods and the authors can fix or troubleshoot or explain their mod in detail because they used AI and don't know how to code. 

[LadyWYT]

2 hours ago, Micah Holmes said:

If your using AI to build a mod, you have no idea what that code will do or can do.

I don't think it's fair to paint every mod author who uses AI tools as people who have no idea what their code will do. Yes, there are definitely some people that will just accept whatever an AI spits out and call it good, without bothering with any kind of quality control. However, there are also several mod authors that are very experienced with doing the work themselves, that offload the "grunt work" onto the AI and make sure that they look through the results and ensure the quality is solid before they release it for public use.

It's also worth pointing out that AI tools can be used in several different ways; it's not always just code writing. Some will do the coding themselves, and use AI to generate images for the thumbnails/other mod assets. Some will use AI to write the entire mod, while others might only use it for snippets. Some might do the coding themselves, but use the AI as a personal librarian to look up things in the code for them, explain how certain parts of the code work, or otherwise get an idea how something might be coded before doing the work themselves. 

Overall, it's not the tool that's the problem. It's whether or not the person using said tool knows how to use the tool correctly, and how much they care about the quality of the finished product.

2 hours ago, Micah Holmes said:

We need to protect this community in my opinion from AI/unsafe mods-code development. Someone tell me i'm wrong and i'm just a cranky old man. Blows my mind seeing all this AI created mods and the authors can fix or troubleshoot or explain their mod in detail because they used AI and don't know how to code. 

I get that it can be frustrating to see swaths of low-effort content. However, low-effort is not something restricted to stuff made with AI tools. There is a filter feature on the mod database that will filter out low-effort/AI content once it reaches a certain threshold--how much gets filtered out depends on how you adjust the filter. A filter is probably the best way to handle a situation like this, since everyone has different levels of what they're willing to put up with. Otherwise you end up opening the door to a pretty draconian set of rules for the modding community, and a lot more mods getting banned than just those who used AI tools in their creation.

[Teh Pizza Lady]

3 hours ago, Micah Holmes said:

Maybe a unpopular view

It is.

3 hours ago, Micah Holmes said:

I don't have a issue teaching those willing to learn how to make mods or write scripts for Vintage story. The fact of the matter is those who build mods with out using AI put a lot of effort into making mods and use our skills to make the game fun and safe for everyone. If your using AI to build a mod, you have no idea what that code will do or can do.

So, I, with a 4-year-degree in Computer Science from one of the top CS universities in the country and have been gainfully employed as a programmer in some form or fashion in multiple languages (C/C++, Java, Python, NodeJS, MeteorJS, JavaScript, C# and Visual Basic, just to name a few), in multiple different areas of life including Higher Education, Finance, and Healthcare don't have any idea what code will or can do. Wow. I need to be fired from my job immediately, I guess.

I code for a living. When I'm not working, I make the AI work for me. Otherwise I'd get burned out and not make any mods at all. It's because of people like me doing it the hard way for decades that others can come behind us and use a tool that pools all our collective knowledge over the years into a single computer program that can write effective code once it understand what you're trying to do and how to do it.

3 hours ago, Micah Holmes said:

I think its disrespectful to the mod community to allow AI code.

I think it's disrespectful to the mod developers to allow this post. Some of the most fun mods on the ModDB right now were coded with AI assistance because the developer had a vision but lacked the skills to see it out and didn't want to deal with grumpy old codgers ranting about how the AI took our jobs! 

3 hours ago, Micah Holmes said:

I've spent over a year developing my mod. A lot of others on here have spent a lot of time as well building their mods.

 cool. Time spent doesn't equal quality. I once joined a company as an L1 developer. The L3 developer above me had spent a year and a half on a data processing tool that was supposed to manage credit card information using the CC company's API. Each API call was costly both monetarily and in the time it took the API to access the information and return it. After a year and a half, this L3 developer declared that his processing tool was finished. What he delivered was about a mile of spaghetti code. It worked, but barely and took forever to process anything. I cleaned it up and reduced it to two function calls. He was fired... and he didn't even put any malware in his program... smh.

3 hours ago, Micah Holmes said:

Someone tell me i'm wrong and i'm just a cranky old man. Blows my mind seeing all this AI created mods and the authors can fix or troubleshoot or explain their mod in detail because they used AI and don't know how to code.

You're wrong. There.

Also examples? Where are you seeing these mod authors who can't fix, troubleshoot, or explain their mods in detail? I'm genuinely curious.

[Micah Holmes]

Quote

You're wrong. There.

Also examples? Where are you seeing these mod authors who can't fix, troubleshoot, or explain their mods in detail? I'm genuinely curious.

I ran into a few mods recently who made there stuff with AI. When pressed in comments by others they could not explain how to fix things and admitted to use AI. In there videos could not explain how it works. I understand we all have lives and AI can be used correctly. I use AI at my job sort of as a "spell checker" for my code. I've been in IT for over 26 years blah blah blah who cares. AI should be used carefully and you need to know what the code does. Take the Air Plane mod for example, I was excited to see it until I seen it was made with AI. The guy could not explain the code or read it. I offered to teach, he explained "he did not have time to learn" but asked for donations for his mod. Donation for what? Pretending to write code. Its not the only AI mod out there. Seems to be a growing trend. there is a ships mod as well. Same story. Don't know why it works. Codes broken, cant fix it. 

 

@LadyWYT I totally understand your point as well. Lots of good devs use AI to build mods. But they know what the code does and how it works. Most importantly why it works. I'm suggesting we limit peoples creativity. I'm saying we need to protect the community from potentially harmful code. If you dont know what your code does, why should it be trusted to be shared with the community?  Forget the fact that your not potentially learning anything by using AI. Its a real risk injecting code into servers. 

 

If your going to insist on using AI, you should at least know how to code and it should be limited to only experienced devs releasing AI built mods on here. I personally think its beyond lazy if you use AI unless its educational purposes. But in the case of this community, its more of a safety concern. @Teh Pizza Lady I'm sorry if you feel disrespected by my point of view. Please understand I work very hard writing code/every line, planing and designing my mods. They are not as great as a lot of mods out there but they are my creations. 

 

Quote

I think it's disrespectful to the mod developers to allow this post. Some of the most fun mods on the ModDB right now were coded with AI assistance because the developer had a vision but lacked the skills to see it out and didn't want to deal with grumpy old codgers ranting about how the AI took our jobs! 

I currently own my own business/software company and teach part time. My skills are up to par. I'm sorry it sounds like you had Sr. dev who was not up to par in your current role. It sadly happens sometimes when people dont invest in their self. Which kind of proves my point. Using AI to write mods is Not investing in your self.  You could argue that using AI is helping you better understand AI and use it from a management standpoint. That's a stretch for video game modding. 

 

I stand by my point, if your going to use AI to write code/mods, You need to understand what its writing and why it works. Otherwise your putting others at risk. 

Edited September 26 by Micah Holmes

[LadyWYT]

9 hours ago, Micah Holmes said:

I'm suggesting we limit peoples creativity. I'm saying we need to protect the community from potentially harmful code.

 

9 hours ago, Micah Holmes said:

If your going to insist on using AI, you should at least know how to code and it should be limited to only experienced devs releasing AI built mods on here.

Okay, so who determines what constitutes "harmful" code, or other things the community needs "protecting" from? How do you determine who "knows how to code" versus who doesn't make the cut? Sure, you can ask them to explain how their code works, but how well do they have to explain it before they're considered "good enough"? Those who are already intimately familiar with coding will likely understand a highly technical explanation well enough, but those who don't know much about computers at all, let alone code itself, probably aren't going to understand the explanation.

Likewise, how do you determine who has enough experience to use the AI tools? Are mod authors supposed to send in a resume and hard proof of their skills? That's not only a massive breach of personal privacy, but that's also something that will absolutely bog down the entire process of uploading mods and discourage a LOT of people from even trying their hand at modding.

9 hours ago, Micah Holmes said:

Take the Air Plane mod for example, I was excited to see it until I seen it was made with AI. The guy could not explain the code or read it. I offered to teach, he explained "he did not have time to learn" but asked for donations for his mod. Donation for what? Pretending to write code. Its not the only AI mod out there. Seems to be a growing trend. there is a ships mod as well. Same story. Don't know why it works. Codes broken, cant fix it. 

So use the report button if you think the mod is low-effort or using AI inappropriately, or is a security risk, breaking TOS, or otherwise is a bit fishy. That's why the button exists. And as I said before, there's a filter to filter out stuff that's been flagged as AI/low-effort, so you don't have to see that content.

Otherwise, it's fine to have personal opinions about what constitutes good content versus bad, and what tools one should use and how. But it's generally in poor taste to force those opinions on others and not allow them to make their own choices, especially if you're doing it under the guise of "protecting" them. I'm perfectly capable of reading a mod description and deciding for myself whether or not I want to use the mod in question. I don't need someone else to do that for me.

10 hours ago, Micah Holmes said:

Using AI to write mods is Not investing in your self.  You could argue that using AI is helping you better understand AI and use it from a management standpoint. That's a stretch for video game modding. 

AI can be a very useful tool for finding information and learning how to figure things out. And when it comes to videogame modding...that's a far cry from professional software development. Yes, there are some high quality mods out there, but most mods tend to be average or below-average, since a lot of mod authors tend not to be professional coders as much as they are gamers just having fun in the sandbox making something cool. Likewise, "professional development" doesn't guarantee that the software is going to be high quality either, because there's quite a lot of software out there that is professionally developed but very poor quality--just look at some of the recent releases from AAA studios.

If we're going to hold modders to professional industry standards though regarding the end products, why stop at AI though? Ban the mods that use bad MS Paint drawings too, because if one can put effort into ensuring the code is top-notch then there's no reason one should slack on the graphics as well. Same goes for mods that are intended for a specific server only and don't include detailed instructions of how to use them outside of that server environment(there are several mods like this cluttering the page)--if one can go to the trouble of making it, they should make sure everyone else knows how to use it. Same for mods that have multiple typos or otherwise have poor grammar in their description--if the mod author can't be bothered to correct spelling mistakes or use proper grammatical syntax in something as simple as a mod description, that doesn't really bode well for their code either.

[Micah Holmes]

Quote

48 minutes ago, LadyWYT said:

Okay, so who determines what constitutes "harmful" code, or other things the community needs "protecting" from? How do you determine who "knows how to code" versus who doesn't make the cut? Sure, you can ask them to explain how their code works, but how well do they have to explain it before they're considered "good enough"? Those who are already intimately familiar with coding will likely understand a highly technical explanation well enough, but those who don't know much about computers at all, let alone code itself, probably aren't going to understand the explanation.

Likewise, how do you determine who has enough experience to use the AI tools? Are mod authors supposed to send in a resume and hard proof of their skills? That's not only a massive breach of personal privacy, but that's also something that will absolutely bog down the entire process of uploading mods and discourage a LOT of people from even trying their hand at modding.

 

First thing we need is a committee or group of people to define "harmful" and create a set of rules and regulations for AI code. This is the foundation for just about any regulatory. If I had to name names whom I think would be great fits from the mod community. I think one of the most respected members is likely @Spear and Fang likely the master of mod development but likely busy working on his own projects. Another potential/example member would be my close friend who is far better dev than my self @Techy. Techy I know understands AI and has a lot of experience with AI. however, he is extremely busy and likely not a option. Anyway, we need a group of skilled devs to volunteer. Point is the committee needs to be people who are skilled, available and willing to take on the burden. Before someone asks me, the answer would be NO. I'm not skilled enough even with my vast experience in IT. I know .Net not vintage story framework. I know the basics of vintage story framework and I could write framework etc but I'm not nearly as skilled as others in the community. 

 

Next thing I personally would say 100% NO AI TEXTURES or ART. Art community has been under attack for years from AI ripping them off and stealing work. This is a community, artist and devs should be collaborating together if you need textures and vice versa in my opinion. I am not an artist but I know how hard and skillful you need to be to make art. Its not easy and needs to be respected. A lot of you will likely disagree because your likely using AI generated art. I will stand firm on that point. 

 

Rules:

First basic rule I suggest if a mod is approved. In the title you must say "AI Creation", in your description a disclaimer very first line "AI created Mod, please use at your own risk". Or something along those lines. Possibly an entire different sub domain for AI mods. Next rule I would suggest. You can not ask for donations of money to support your AI creation. Its not fair to reward those who did not write their own code. 

 

Quote

So use the report button if you think the mod is low-effort or using AI inappropriately, or is a security risk, breaking TOS, or otherwise is a bit fishy. That's why the button exists. And as I said before, there's a filter to filter out stuff that's been flagged as AI/low-effort, so you don't have to see that content.

Otherwise, it's fine to have personal opinions about what constitutes good content versus bad, and what tools one should use and how. But it's generally in poor taste to force those opinions on others and not allow them to make their own choices, especially if you're doing it under the guise of "protecting" them. I'm perfectly capable of reading a mod description and deciding for myself whether or not I want to use the mod in question. I don't need someone else to do that for me.

I honestly believe 90%+ of this community would be honest and tell people who used AI. But your right there is always that 1 person who wants to go under the radar. You cant catch everyone but you can question those whom are reported. First offense would be warning. Second offense ban from mod community. 

 

Quote

AI can be a very useful tool for finding information and learning how to figure things out. And when it comes to videogame modding...that's a far cry from professional software development. Yes, there are some high quality mods out there, but most mods tend to be average or below-average, since a lot of mod authors tend not to be professional coders as much as they are gamers just having fun in the sandbox making something cool. Likewise, "professional development" doesn't guarantee that the software is going to be high quality either, because there's quite a lot of software out there that is professionally developed but very poor quality--just look at some of the recent releases from AAA studios.

 Researching a mod using AI is not an offense in any way shape or form. As a developer, I used stack overflow and online forums for 99% of my career for the last 26+ years. Some books as well of course but mostly online research. AI has made researching ideas and confirming recipes combinations easier and more accurate. Vintage Story is about accuracy and realism. Researching your mod design or concept using AI I personally dont think violates safety or degrades anyone. Not much different than using a card catalog or Google Search. You still have to write the code or paint the picture. 

 

At the end of the day, for anything to happen as I suggested above. The creators have to be the ones to say yes and agree to regulating their product. This is about protecting the community from harmful code, regulating code, making users of mods more aware of what they are using and the risks. Also about protecting the artist and creators of mods and their creativity. If we dont protect peoples creations, no one will benefit or want to create. Think about Copyright laws and why they exist. Same concept applies here and everywhere people cheat the system and use AI. 

Edited September 26 by Micah Holmes

[Teh Pizza Lady]

11 hours ago, Micah Holmes said:

I ran into a few mods recently who made there stuff with AI. When pressed in comments by others they could not explain how to fix things and admitted to use AI. In there videos could not explain how it works. I understand we all have lives and AI can be used correctly. I use AI at my job sort of as a "spell checker" for my code. I've been in IT for over 26 years blah blah blah who cares. AI should be used carefully and you need to know what the code does.

I agree, but I'm not over here calling for mods developed with AI assistance to be banned outright. Using an AI tool for development is no different than searching stack overflow and copy/pasting someone else's code. If you don't understand it, then you don't understand it. No amount of "do it the right way" will teach someone who is just unwilling to learn. Are you also going to call for the banning of mods that use code that someone just copied and pasted?

11 hours ago, Micah Holmes said:

I offered to teach, he explained "he did not have time to learn" but asked for donations for his mod. Donation for what? Pretending to write code.

Claude ain't gonna pay for itself. Trust me, I tried.

11 hours ago, Micah Holmes said:

If your going to insist on using AI, you should at least know how to code and it should be limited to only experienced devs releasing AI built mods on here. I personally think its beyond lazy if you use AI unless its [for] educational purposes. But in the case of this community, its more of a safety concern. @Teh Pizza Lady I'm sorry if you feel disrespected by my point of view. Please understand I work very hard writing code/every line, planning and designing my mods. They are not as great as a lot of mods out there but they are my creations.

*you're *it's *missing a word *planning

If you put as much care into your forum posts as you do your code, AND offering to teach others, then I don't think you should be teaching. Not trying to be mean, I'm just kindly pointing out that you've been here asking for help with simple things, not understanding why stuff doesn't work and then looking down on others who are just trying to do the same thing as you: play in their little sandbox and have fun in the dirt, without really knowing what they're doing. If you kick mud in their eyes, then not only will they not want to learn, but they will likely stop any learning that has already occurred. This is why Stack Overflow was on the decline before the big LLM boom. SO regulars were already kicking mud in people's eyes because they weren't playing in the dirt the same way as everyone else, asking the same questions, and not finding the answers they sought because they weren't asking the questions in the "right way". People found LLMs easier to work with because they provided the same answers as Stack Overflow in a fraction of the time and didn't judge the users for asking them.

You are literally part of the problem with the way you are acting. People like you are what gave Stack Overflow a bad name before ChatGPT ever hit the shelves.

11 hours ago, Micah Holmes said:

I currently own my own business/software company and teach part time. My skills are up to par. I'm sorry it sounds like you had Sr. dev who was not up to par in your current role. It sadly happens sometimes when people dont invest in their self. Which kind of proves my point. Using AI to write mods is Not investing in your self.

No, it doesn't prove your point because you are misinterpreting what I said. I said time spent doesn't equal quality. Effort doesn't equal quality... I didn't say that and I should have. In my example, I took one look at it and asked what the program was supposed to do and knocked it out in an afternoon, tested it over the week and shipped it. SO WHAT if someone used an AI tool to guide them or even do most of the heavy lifting? Did they have fun? Is the mod fun? Does it mostly work? AI isn't going to solve the problems that the developer guiding it doesn't know exist. But either way, that's not the point... the point was that you come in here claiming "I'm doing this the hard way. Anyone who doesn't, hasn't earned a seat at the table." Well from my standpoint, judging based purely on what I see on these forums alone, you haven't earned that seat either. Gatekeeping isn't so much fun when it's used on you, now is it?

28 minutes ago, Micah Holmes said:

First basic rule I suggest if a mod is approved. In the title you must say "AI Creation", in your description a disclaimer very first line "AI created Mod, please use at your own risk". Or something along those lines. Possibly an entire different sub domain for AI mods. Next rule I would suggest. You can not ask for donations of money to support your AI creation. Its not fair to reward those who did not write their own code.

As previously established, you haven't earned your seat at the table, so you don't get to make rules.

30 minutes ago, Micah Holmes said:

Researching a mod using AI is not an offense in any way shape or form. As a developer, I used stack overflow and online forums for 99% of my career for the last 26+ years. Some books as well of course but mostly online research. AI has made researching ideas and confirming recipes combinations easier and more accurate.

you literally just admitted to using AI to help you write your mods.   here's your ban, I guess.

31 minutes ago, Micah Holmes said:

Think about Copyright laws and why they exist. Same concept applies here and everywhere people cheat the system and use AI. 

and 100% of the code used to teach the AI programs was used under license. A large majority of it came from Stack Overflow actually...

Explain to me how posting in the forums and getting help or copying and pasting from Stack Overflow and not crediting the people who helped you is different from using and AI tool and not disclosing it.

[Micah Holmes]

Quote

If you put as much care into your forum posts as you do your code, AND offering to teach others, then I don't think you should be teaching. Not trying to be mean, I'm just kindly pointing out that you've been here asking for help with simple things, not understanding why stuff doesn't work and then looking down on others who are just trying to do the same thing as you: play in their little sandbox and have fun in the dirt, without really knowing what they're doing. If you kick mud in their eyes, then not only will they not want to learn, but they will likely stop any learning that has already occurred. This is why Stack Overflow was on the decline before the big LLM boom. SO regulars were already kicking mud in people's eyes because they weren't playing in the dirt the same way as everyone else, asking the same questions, and not finding the answers they sought because they weren't asking the questions in the "right way". People found LLMs easier to work with because they provided the same answers as Stack Overflow in a fraction of the time and didn't judge the users for asking them.

You are literally part of the problem with the way you are acting. People like you are what gave Stack Overflow a bad name before ChatGPT ever hit the shelves.

I'm glad Im a part of the problem and force people to learn. I'm happy to force people to learn and empower their selves with knowledge. i'm happy to be that old guy that forces you to use your brain and think. Please tell me more how horrible I am for wanting people to build their own stuff. 

[LadyWYT]

15 minutes ago, Micah Holmes said:

First thing we need is a committee or group of people to define "harmful" and create a set of rules and regulations for AI code.

Who determines the committee though? And are they getting paid for this work, or just unpaid volunteers? Who enforces the rules? How do you determine what is AI code and what isn't, and how do you handle false positives(because it's going to happen)?

31 minutes ago, Micah Holmes said:

Point is the committee needs to be people who are skilled, available and willing to take on the burden.

And work for free. This is not a small job that you're asking people to do either. Someone has to sink the time into making the decisions, writing the rules, enforcing those rules, and dealing with all the fallout that will inevitably result because not everyone is going to agree with those rules.

And keeping in mind that the more work you offload onto volunteers, the more it's going to make you look like you're just taking advantage of people so you don't have to actually pay them for their time, knowledge, and skill.

34 minutes ago, Micah Holmes said:

This is about protecting the community from harmful code, regulating code, making users of mods more aware of what they are using and the risks.

With all due respect, I don't believe that's what all this is actually about. It very much comes across as wanting to enforce one's own personal opinion and preferences on the rest of the community, using "protection" and "quality" as the excuse. As I said in my previous post, I'm capable of reading mod descriptions and looking at screenshots and deciding for myself if a mod is something I want to use or not. My preferences are also different than the preferences of others, and there are things I will tolerate that others will not and vice versa. I don't want someone else telling me what mods I'm allowed to play with anymore than I want to be making that decision for other players.

 

4 minutes ago, Teh Pizza Lady said:

If you kick mud in their eyes, then not only will they not want to learn, but they will likely stop any learning that has already occurred.

I think it's also fair to point out that when it comes to modding, maybe instead of trashing those who are relying on AI because they're still learning and don't have the time to learn or the skills and knowledge to do everything themselves yet, maybe the more experienced modders could offer to help them instead of trashing them and demanding the ban of a useful tool? Granted, it's probably not going to happen, because it's much easier to whinge about it and demand banning of the thing you don't like rather than devoting your own time, skill, and resources into helping others learn, but anyway...

[Novadegree]

It won't be too long, and you'll just be able to tell AI what kind of game you want, and it will make it for you. Engineers, computer programmers, even actors and writers will be replaced as will most jobs as advances in AI and robotics are made.  I guess you could say, "I fought it till the end". 

Believe it or not.  

Edited September 26 by Novadegree

[Tj Pepler - Critcher]

Please understand what I am saying, If you take someone who has no idea how to paint and give them a paintbrush, and they paint your house, it will be sloppy, you will not like the result.  A professional painter with the same brush will do a wonderful job and you will be happy with the result.  AI is a tool and in unskilled hands it will produce unwanted results, in experienced hands it can do great things.  It is inevitable and every power and authority in the world uses AI now, no matter how you feel, or what you think, the trajectory will not change, AI is everywhere, in everything and everyone uses it, 99.9% of the people who oppose AI are hypocrites using systems built and maintained almost exclusively by AI, Windows, Linux and Mac OS are all heavily supported and built by AI now.  Every piece of software you use has been touched by AI and even the game you are defending is built using tools influenced by AI.  I hope that this can put an end to all these comments, they are not helpful in any way and only serve to cause negative feelings and rifts in the community.

/2 cents

[Teh Pizza Lady]

1 hour ago, Tj Pepler - Critcher said:

Please understand what I am saying, If you take someone who has no idea how to paint and give them a paintbrush, and they paint your house, it will be sloppy, you will not like the result.  A professional painter with the same brush will do a wonderful job and you will be happy with the result.  AI is a tool and in unskilled hands it will produce unwanted results, in experienced hands it can do great things.  It is inevitable and every power and authority in the world uses AI now, no matter how you feel, or what you think, the trajectory will not change, AI is everywhere, in everything and everyone uses it, 99.9% of the people who oppose AI are hypocrites using systems built and maintained almost exclusively by AI, Windows, Linux and Mac OS are all heavily supported and built by AI now.  Every piece of software you use has been touched by AI and even the game you are defending is built using tools influenced by AI.  I hope that this can put an end to all these comments, they are not helpful in any way and only serve to cause negative feelings and rifts in the community.

/2 cents

I guess we have to ban SurvivalMod.dll for being built using a tool that has AI-generated code in it.

[Srkku]

1) There is something to be said that mods are made as a pastime for users. It's a hobby. I understand that there's a certain personal loss involved when the author of a mod you grow attached to can't fix a bug and it ruins the game for you. Even then, any author, AI or not, still sunk so much time into making mods. We don't owe each other anything. People are free to avoid AI-involved mods, and people are free to make mods using AI. A good compromise is a AI-Use disclaimer on mod pages.

2) There's too many comments on the mod db that just talk about AI. It's incessant. At some point it's just spam.