Re: Concerns about the evidence for the AI scraper problem and the resulting blocking

Mark Wielaard <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gcc.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi,

On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 07:36:38PM +0100, Kalamatee via Gcc wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 at 19:09, Xe Iaso <[email protected]> wrote:
> > One of the main ways resources are being exhausted is that git blame
> > queries can take up gigabytes of ram and consume entire CPU cores to
> > answer a single query that links to other pages that will also consume
> > gigabytes of ram and consume entire CPU cores.

git blame has been disabled in cgit (and gitweb).

> > I will provide the Sourceware team a script to fetch the IP addresses
> > for GitHub Actions and a few other CI providers so that they can get
> > through with minimal interference. If you know of any CI providers that
> > are having issues, please link them so they can be allowlisted.

Thanks. And yes, we have allow lists of known CI runners. Please let
us know if your setup is impacted by the 429s generated because of the
AI scraperbot attacks.

> > These two arguments read like they were hallucinated by an AI model.
> >
> > Please provide the original text used when prompting your model and
> > details about which AI setup was used to fabricate the utterances in
> > your email.
> [...] 
> And on the AI comment: whether I used an AI tool to help formulate the
> email doesn't really affect the technical argument. If I've got something
> technically wrong, I'm happy to be corrected on that basis.

Please reconsider your usage of these genAI-LLM chatbots for
discussions on this mailinglist. You might believe the arguments are
"technical" but they really only sound like that. It is a bit rude to
generate these discussions on a mailinglist of a project that already
said they won't allow such "contributions" as code. Making people
guess whether something said is an honest (human) contribution to the
discussion or some genAI-LLM halucination is not nice. It isn't
currently disallowed by policy, but I hope we will at least consider
to make it a code of conduct issue.

Thanks,

Mark
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.