Notes on "slop"

Here’s what I missed in the AI field this week — I was on holiday in Tokyo.

Two new models dropped within about 15 minutes of each other: Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3-Codex. Amp immediately adopted Opus 4.6 for its smart mode, but GPT-5.3-Codex is only available in their Codex app, not yet via the API. I believe Amp will adopt it for its deep mode once it’s generally available.

Amp is sunsetting the editor extension next month. It hasn’t been officially announced yet, but the team mentioned it in their latest Raising An Agent podcast episode. I use Amp exclusively through the editor extension, so unfortunately I’ll have to switch to the TUI version and get used to it.

Ghostty’s author Mitchell Hashimoto has been busy lately:

• Ghostty’s updated AI usage policy for contributions. More and more open source projects are drowning in AI-generated issues and PRs submitted without human review — the slop. He proposed a new policy for dealing with this trend. It’s not against AI, but makes every AI-generated contribution accountable to a human.
• Vouch, a community trust management system. A tool that puts the policy above into practice. To mitigate the slop burden, open source projects should build a network to identify trustworthy contributors.
• My AI Adoption Journey. Mitchell’s reflections on his AI adoption journey. Most of it resonates with me — and probably with every thoughtful developer.

AI Transparency Statement (via). More and more content on the internet is generated by AI these days, and there’s a new word slop to describe the wave of unwanted, unreviewed, and low-value AI-generated content. It’s so alarming that people are starting to be paranoid about the quality of the content they see online, even obviously handcrafted and curated ones.

One of the indicators is the em dashes (—). Since AI-generated content often includes em dashes, they become a signal, and a warning: you might be reading AI-generated content.

It’s usually not true. But the paranoia runs so deep that some writers like Armin Ronacher now publish statements to defend their work.

As for me, I guarantee that all content here is written by me, though I do use AI tools to help review and refine my writing (like this one), and it’s me who does the thinking and makes the final decision. That’s an appropriate way to use AI as an editing tool, in my opinion. Maybe I should write a similar statement for this website too — and maybe every content creator should do the same.