There are now a wide variety of categories and projects on noailist.org, the list of projects that have specifically chosen not to use AI.
i noticed you have tuta listed; fyi, see here for a recent commit in one of their repos which says it is “co-authored by claude”. (tuta is shitty and shouldn’t be advertised for various other reasons also…)
Why is Tuta shitty?
I switched from Proton a year ago or so because the CEO is a Trumper. But I haven’t seen anything bad about Tuta, so I am curious if I need to switch again.
I dunno if it qualifies as shitty, but I’ve always been annoyed that they are in no way interoperable with email and calendar standards.
Kind of I guess? i don’t use these features.
Why is Tuta shitty?
here and here are two of my past comments about them with more links, but, tldr:
- their email encryption is not interoperable
- their encrypted email service encourages people to use a browser-based thing with an incoherent threat model: the server that the e2ee is supposed to protect you from is the same one that serves you the code each time, which means that it would trivial to subvert it on-demand for targeted users with a negligibly-small chance of anyone catching them in the act. this is an example of cryptographic snake oil.
- note that whether (or how often) they actually do subvert their encryption for targeted users is unproven; it has been alleged in court testimony that they do, and that the entire service is in fact a honey pot for doing exactly this (see my other comments for a link about that), but the testimony is perhaps not the most credible. however, the fact that they have the ability to do this (and without much chance of being caught) is undeniable and obvious to experts while being very much not obvious to most of their users.
- they are incessant blog spammers, writing advertorials about every vaguely-privacy-related news event to promote their products
- and, a new item on the list (not particularly surprising, given their history of shameless hucksterism): their README claims a clear policy against AI contributions but if you click that link and scroll up and click the three dots next to the commit message (“test plugin kit and nextcloud plugin”) you can see it says “Assisted-by: Claude:claude-sonnet-5”. (This kind of dishonest bandwagon-jumping-on is very on-brand for tuta.)
Thanks for the thorough answer.
Well, guess I need to find a new provider.
for tAInted projects and their alternatives: https://codeberg.org/ethical-foss/open-slopware/
Another one to look through, the more the merrier
yay glad my addition is welcome ^^
I love seeing these updates.
There’s a project I intend to release to the world some day in the not too distant future, and I very much intend for it to be included in this list. Along with the strongest anti-AI statement I can possibly reasonably have.
The issue is AI users will ignore those warnings or licenses and index your code anyway
Many of the items in operating system section do contain AI as they use the Linux kernel and as such should be removed.
It seems like a logical disclaimer, but I guess they are assuming that if you got this far, you already know. Their removal from the list wouldn’t help anyone decent.
i don’t think this project is about building an entire ai-free stack, it’s about showcasing project communities that care
if you want to have an entire ai-free software stack, assuming you want it to be up to date, i’m sorry to say it but you’ll have to throw your computer in the trash because that’s not really possible anymore…
It’s literally called the no AI list, not the they use AI but like they don’t like it list.
yea, they don’t use ai. they don’t not use projects which use ai. frustratingly, that’s basically impossible today…
NetBSD is still slop-free!
