Repository navigation
RFC: Accepting and flagging AI-assisted resources #273
Description
awesome-gbdev currently has no policy on listing resources that were developed with AI assistance.
Note that the gbdev AI Coding Assistants policy covers contributions to gbdev projects (i.e. the PR contents), not the external resources being linked. Some of our other collections, like Homebrew Hub, starting from Game Entry schema Draft 5, already have their own policy for this.
Questions:
- Do we allow AI-developed resources in the list?
- What level of AI usage requires disclosure?
- How should it be shown (e.g. an icon, an asterisk or tag next to the name)?
Activity
Rangi42 commentedon Oct 2, 2026
Commenting so this doesn't stay open indefinitely and stall more contributions:
AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.mdand an AI is one of the top few committers and the README is in an AI model's writing style, that certainly counts. On the other hand, just debugging a program with AI, or having merged a couple contributors' AI-assisted PRs, doesn't really make something "an AI program".dogboydog commentedon Oct 3, 2026
nitro2k01 commentedon Oct 3, 2026
@dogboydog To take the most light use example possible, from the real world. I have a project (hash-bench-gb-asm) where everything is human made, except a 150 line Python script for parsing a log file that the ROM can output. This script is not required to build or run the ROM itself. Would that get the same "mark of shame" as a project that was essentially built from the ground up by the clanker? If that ends up being the case, there should probably be some sort of grading system of light vs significant AI use or something.
dogboydog commentedon Oct 3, 2026
I think it would make sense to have an optional blurb beside the emoji/whatever about the extent of AI content like in the first response to question 3 (e.g. "some AI assisted code" , "Optional AI generated test tool", versus "Fully AI generated")
The judgement of what to feel about projects with the AI assisted label is in the eye of the beholder, but to me if you're going to exempt AI code contributions due to not being large enough or something, there's not much point labeling at all. I would find it misleading to have some projects not labeled as containing AI just because there was a judgment call that it was only X percent of the code.
Most people probably won't care it has the AI label anyway, but those who care I would think want the most transparency possible
Rangi42 commentedon Oct 3, 2026
For simplicity's sake, how about a 🤖 for "nonzero AI-generated content" (a nonessential script like nitro's, or one feature out of a hundred, or some bugfixes) and a ✨ for "majority AI-generated content" (the stereotypical "vibe-coded" project). If the contributor wants to go into detail about how AI is involved, they can do so, but I doubt the users who want to avoid AI period would care about exactly which features or bugfixes or docs were AI-assisted, so that would be extra verbosity of limited use.
Rangi42 commentedon Oct 3, 2026
Somewhat related: GB Studio on AI tools: https://nitter.kareem.one/gbs_central/status/2106374531644555335#m
quinnyo commentedon Oct 12, 2026
My personal preference would be to put them in a separate section. That way "AI" connoisseurs can head straight to the source instead of having to search for it, and there's much reduced risk of betraying people who feel otherwise.
@dogboydog I don't know how you came to that conclusion. A lot of people are disgusted by "AI", especially so in retrocomputer/retrogame spaces.
Rangi42 commentedon Oct 12, 2026
@avivace If we don't want emojis, then perhaps "(AI-assisted)" and "(AI-generated)" would work as required labels instead (again, allowing creators to add more explanation if they want to, but only requiring that "none/some/most" level of precision).
meta: add AI disclosure markings/contribution guidelines (#273)
ISSOtm commentedon Oct 16, 2026
IMO, vibe-coded projects should be banned from the list (and our showcase channels) unless they are submitted separately and approved on the basis of “significant contribution” (e.g. #268 AFAICT).
The problem is that they are drowning out projects made by people with actual effort instead of just money, and thus making the latter group not rewarded for their efforts and much more likely to give up (yes, that's in French).
To all the vibe-coders out there
Yes, you made something, and it's great that it's functional! But—please bear with me for a few paragraphs—what have you learned, and why should you be rewarded since it won't be for time spent building it? We are a community of people who value craftsmanship; if you disagree then you're just in the wrong place.
And don't forget that your agents are drawing from (or, regrettably often, plainly stealing from) the work of such people, without whom you would have neither the tools that enable your enjoyment nor the venues where you're sharing it.
In that sense, you are our guests; please understand our manners and history, or even if not, please have some respect. Thank you.
dogboydog commentedon Oct 16, 2026
I'm one of them, but just anecdotally, I don't think the verbally anti AI folks like myself are a majority of the general population. Many people I know who hate AI imagery don't care about AI code or use it themselves, and in the professional software programming space I meet almost no one who doesn't use it other than me. You can also see the popularity of a lot of 100% vibe coded decompilations of apps and games. I'm not saying they shouldn't care, but outside of anti AI self selected communities, I see barely anyone caring in real life.