If the submitter acts as a competent gatekeeper to keep out the crap, no-one will know and neither will they care.

If they can already tell easily whether or not a submission is bad, what is the relevance of an AI ban? It will push out good contributors who use AI responsibly, and presumably make zero effect on people just wanting to abuse AI to get a patch into Gentoo. You still have to do the exact same work to tell whether a contribution is good or not.

> If they can already tell easily whether or not a submission is bad...

There's no implication in what I wrote that this is the case. The fact is that weeding out the crap is a tedious and difficult job, and maintainers (especially volunteer ones) don't deserve the extra burden brought by automated crap generation.

> It will push out good contributors who use AI responsibly...

My entire comment, which is just one sentence long, explains why this will not be the case.

>... and presumably make zero effect on people just wanting to abuse AI to get a patch into Gentoo.

That's not everybody (or if it is, Gentoo is screwed anyway, which does not mean it's not worth trying to stop it happening.)

These points have been made by multiple people in these comments over the last few hours.

It's not about "how".

When it is discovered that your submission is AI generated, it is enough reason to discard the submission without having to review it any further.

Many open communities do the same.

"Many communities depend on AI tools to detect and ban AI content" interesting...

If not depending on AI tools then depending on a... hunch? So like a modern-era witch hunting?

I mean, I came across a StackOverflow post the other day with "I apologize for the misunderstanding." in the middle of it.

There's a bit of a "intro paragraph, five numbered list items, concluding paragraph" style format that you start to notice pretty quickly.

Certainly, but you can prompt the LLM to write following a specific style.