Starting at Linkedin. They don't seem to be on Mastodon or Bluesky, I quit X and don't care any more for content there.
-> if you would like to share it, feel free: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jarekpotiuk_outlier-you-are-doing-it-wrong-please-activity-7289278690213990400-MOuC J. On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 2:43 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > Ok. The issue continues. I am raising to a bit higher level and start to > complain on https://outlier.ai/ in social media - they are driving those > issues. > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 7:59 PM Russell Spitzer <russell.spit...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Obviously as an OSS Dev I don't mind folks profiting from the work I'm >> doing as >> long as they collaborate with the community in good faith. But this feels >> like well beyond >> the pale in creating additional work only in bad faith, but also not as a >> member >> of the community. >> >> Personally it's very upsetting to me to spend time helping someone on an >> issue only to realize >> that not only do they not care, but they also were paid to waste my time >> to >> make someone >> else money. Being welcoming to users who don't understand the project is >> difficult and time >> consuming and I'd hate it if we can't do that because there is too much >> risk that the user isn't >> even real. >> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 12:49 PM Piotr Findeisen < >> piotr.findei...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi >> > >> > This ultimately means they train AI on the contributors & maintainers. >> > Either indirectly -- by extending high quality projects, or directly -- >> by >> > observing how project maintainers react to these issues. >> > Since the maintainers' time is a 'free resource' for them, it >> economically >> > makes sense :( >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 at 19:35, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: >> > >> >> FYI - I got some information where it originated from. Basically this >> is >> >> one of a "crowdsource expert humans to train AI" platforms - where >> they pay >> >> people for some AI tasks. >> >> >> >> Apparently they are running some campaign to "crowdsource" training the >> >> AI by human experts to write better issues. They use "reputable" >> >> repositories like Airflow and Iceberg with good and poor issues - and >> >> people they pay are supposed to take existing issue reports and write >> >> "better versions of those issues". >> >> They provided some instructions and videos to the people on how to do >> it, >> >> and that involved actually showing how to create an issue in Airflow >> repo >> >> using our templates (which were considered high quality) explaining >> what is >> >> important to add and fill, explaining that labels are important etc. >> etc. >> >> (apparently they did not realize that contributors cannot add labels >> and >> >> that the labels are added by DoSu). >> >> The instructions were tricking people into actually creating issues in >> >> real Airflow repo. >> >> >> >> The assumption they have is that crowdsourced humans can take such >> >> "poorly written issues" and "rewrite them in a better way" to train AI >> to >> >> help to write better issues - this has some AI assistance to generate >> >> initial content from such "poorly written issues" - as far as I >> understand. >> >> >> >> I am quite sure people from that platform are listening in - they seem >> to >> >> react and stop the people from doing what they were doing (or so it >> seems). >> >> So I hope they will not make that mistake again - and that they will be >> >> more careful. Or else ... >> >> >> >> Sharing publicly the name of that platform would be rather painful for >> >> them - so I am not going to do that publicly - but feel free to reach >> out >> >> to me personally if you know me - I will gladly share it. >> >> >> >> Taking into account what effect this could have on maintainers, also I >> >> think - judging by the quality of the issues we had - the assumption >> they >> >> had is completely wrong. Any of their customers who run their campaign >> >> would likely be pretty discouraged to continue working with them >> knowing >> >> the quality of data they got in. >> >> >> >> After understanding better how people are currently attempting to train >> >> AI for such tasks, I am quite certain we have nothing to be afraid of >> - AI >> >> is not going to replace us :). I am only afraid that we will have to >> learn >> >> how to deal with the huge amount of "AI slop" that we are going to >> get. But >> >> I am already suggesting to some of the friends working with AI that >> having >> >> OSS-friendly AI services to filter out such "AI slop" is a very good >> >> business to have. >> >> >> >> J. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 9:20 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Just as a little follow up - I think I have a hypothesis about what >> >>> happened. >> >>> >> >>> We got one other user creating one issue which was very similar and >> from >> >>> this comment I gather: >> >>> >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45940#issuecomment-2608307111 >> >>> >> >>> * there is some tool out there that is supposed to make "issue >> creation" >> >>> easier - with help of AI >> >>> * some test accounts were used to test it (likely there are people who >> >>> have a bunch of fake Github accounts they maintain to test new things >> with >> >>> AI) >> >>> * apparently some "real" people also got their hands on that tool and >> >>> tried it >> >>> * this tool LIKELY used "airflow" and "iceberg" in some documentation >> or >> >>> default settings as "examples" >> >>> * apparently this tool mislead people into thinking they are "testing" >> >>> issue creation where it actually created those issues >> >>> * I guess whoever has the tool realised their mistake and either >> stopped >> >>> it or removed some confusion >> >>> * I have my own suspicions (which I am exploring) - but I asked the >> user >> >>> to provide information about what tooling they were using (and the >> user was >> >>> apologising, and expressed willingness to provide more information so >> I >> >>> hope I will get more information soon). >> >>> >> >>> J. >> >>> >> >>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:57 AM Piotr Findeisen < >> >>> piotr.findei...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> Hi >> >>>> >> >>>> Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter! >> >>>> >> >>>> > Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow >> >>>> repo if >> >>>> we see it happening again? >> >>>> >> >>>> Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me >> (also >> >>>> for >> >>>> Iceberg). >> >>>> >> >>>> Best >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer < >> >>>> russell.spit...@gmail.com> >> >>>> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> > This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see >> that >> >>>> > using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the >> >>>> project >> >>>> > which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed. >> >>>> > >> >>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> >> >>>> wrote: >> >>>> > >> >>>> >> - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:) >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar >> >>>> report >> >>>> >> for the last 4 hours or so. >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are >> >>>> looking >> >>>> >> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, >> but I >> >>>> >> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when >> >>>> something >> >>>> >> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from >> >>>> >> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe >> >>>> >> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some >> >>>> initial >> >>>> >> reports? Does it sound reasonable? >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> J. >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu < >> >>>> >> gopidesupa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >>> +1 from me. >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these >> tickets >> >>>> when >> >>>> >>> new users starts testing those AI agents. >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> Regards, >> >>>> >>> Pavan Kumar >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> >> wrote: >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new >> >>>> users" - >> >>>> >>> > created just an hour or so ago. >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions >> >>>> with the >> >>>> >>> repo >> >>>> >>> > for new users - see this screenshot: >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA >> ticket >> >>>> for >> >>>> >>> that, >> >>>> >>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml - and >> >>>> maybe if >> >>>> >>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single >> >>>> ticket for >> >>>> >>> > that. >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation >> >>>> and >> >>>> >>> testing >> >>>> >>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest >> >>>> roundtable) - >> >>>> >>> and >> >>>> >>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but >> >>>> >>> temporarily we >> >>>> >>> > might want to ask INFRA to help. >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I >> >>>> will >> >>>> >>> open a >> >>>> >>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of >> ours >> >>>> think >> >>>> >>> as >> >>>> >>> > well :) >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > J. >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk < >> ja...@potiuk.com> >> >>>> >>> wrote: >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are >> coming >> >>>> at the >> >>>> >>> > same >> >>>> >>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are >> >>>> very. >> >>>> >>> .... >> >>>> >>> > > strange >> >>>> >>> > > >> >>>> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif < >> elad...@apache.org >> >>>> > >> >>>> >>> wrote: >> >>>> >>> > > >> >>>> >>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg >> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 >> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920 >> >>>> >>> > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title. >> >>>> >>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, >> >>>> with some >> >>>> >>> > minor >> >>>> >>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to >> Github >> >>>> >>> > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk < >> >>>> ja...@potiuk.com> >> >>>> >>> wrote: >> >>>> >>> > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" >> trials, >> >>>> >>> where >> >>>> >>> > >> someone >> >>>> >>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in >> the >> >>>> repo >> >>>> >>> > would". >> >>>> >>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained. >> >>>> >>> > >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong < >> >>>> >>> fo...@apache.org> >> >>>> >>> > >> wrote: >> >>>> >>> > >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes >> >>>> >>> self-close >> >>>> >>> > the >> >>>> >>> > >> > issue >> >>>> >>> > >> > > (eg here < >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032 >> >>>> >). >> >>>> >>> Closed >> >>>> >>> > >> > after 1 >> >>>> >>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my >> >>>> mailbox. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk < >> >>>> >>> ja...@potiuk.com>: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Example case: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904 - >> >>>> airflow >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - >> >>>> iceberg >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value >> >>>> except >> >>>> >>> > noise. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you >> >>>> look at >> >>>> >>> > their >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg >> >>>> and >> >>>> >>> airflow >> >>>> >>> > >> > about >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now >> >>>> than you >> >>>> >>> > >> think. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > J. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk < >> >>>> >>> ja...@potiuk.com> >> >>>> >>> > >> wrote: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit >> >>>> too >> >>>> >>> many - >> >>>> >>> > >> and >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a >> very >> >>>> >>> > rudimentary >> >>>> >>> > >> > check >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22 >> >>>> >>> > >> > > . >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the >> last 12 >> >>>> >>> hours. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't >> accidentally >> >>>> close >> >>>> >>> > issues >> >>>> >>> > >> > that >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the >> >>>> project. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very >> human-like - >> >>>> they >> >>>> >>> are >> >>>> >>> > >> > > reported >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem >> >>>> >>> legitimate, >> >>>> >>> > >> but >> >>>> >>> > >> > > they >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that >> those >> >>>> are >> >>>> >>> > >> completely >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the >> >>>> problem, >> >>>> >>> that it >> >>>> >>> > >> > takes >> >>>> >>> > >> > > a >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are >> valid >> >>>> or >> >>>> >>> not - >> >>>> >>> > and >> >>>> >>> > >> > with >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze >> >>>> whether >> >>>> >>> they >> >>>> >>> > are >> >>>> >>> > >> > good >> >>>> >>> > >> > > or >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> bad. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> J. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong < >> >>>> >>> > fo...@apache.org >> >>>> >>> > >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> wrote: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek, >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you >> >>>> talk >> >>>> >>> about >> >>>> >>> > >> > > flooding, >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious >> >>>> issues >> >>>> >>> (eg, >> >>>> >>> > >> here >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), >> >>>> but not >> >>>> >>> > many. >> >>>> >>> > >> I >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all >> >>>> additional >> >>>> >>> > work, >> >>>> >>> > >> > and >> >>>> >>> > >> > > we >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally >> close >> >>>> >>> issues >> >>>> >>> > >> that >> >>>> >>> > >> > > don't >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards, >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Fokko >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk < >> >>>> >>> > ja...@potiuk.com >> >>>> >>> > >> >: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded >> >>>> with a >> >>>> >>> > number >> >>>> >>> > >> of >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> issues >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI >> >>>> >>> generated >> >>>> >>> > and >> >>>> >>> > >> > make >> >>>> >>> > >> > > no >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We >> noticed >> >>>> >>> that the >> >>>> >>> > >> > users >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> who >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are >> >>>> created in >> >>>> >>> > Airflow >> >>>> >>> > >> > are >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and >> >>>> reporting such >> >>>> >>> > >> issues >> >>>> >>> > >> > to >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without >> >>>> >>> spending too >> >>>> >>> > >> much >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> time on >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ``` >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue >> >>>> report that >> >>>> >>> > >> brings >> >>>> >>> > >> > no >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> value >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking >> users >> >>>> that >> >>>> >>> > sends a >> >>>> >>> > >> > lot >> >>>> >>> > >> > > of >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of >> yesterday >> >>>> so we >> >>>> >>> will >> >>>> >>> > >> > report >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> your >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ``` >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is >> >>>> testing an >> >>>> >>> > >> "agentic >> >>>> >>> > >> > AI" >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> that >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI >> >>>> agents >> >>>> >>> on >> >>>> >>> > >> their >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> behalf. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source >> >>>> reporting it >> >>>> >>> to >> >>>> >>> > >> > Github - >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those >> >>>> without >> >>>> >>> > involving >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > J. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message --------- >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > To: <d...@airflow.apache.org> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue >> (... >> >>>> at >> >>>> >>> the top >> >>>> >>> > >> and >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> "report >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > content") >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai < >> >>>> >>> > >> > > amoghdesai....@gmail.com> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > wrote: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards, >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif < >> >>>> >>> > >> elad...@apache.org> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> wrote: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017 >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account >> to >> >>>> >>> github. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת >> >>>> Pavankumar >> >>>> >>> > Gopidesu >> >>>> >>> > >> < >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupa...@gmail.com>: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards, >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai < >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai....@gmail.com >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull >> >>>> requests >> >>>> >>> as >> >>>> >>> > >> well, >> >>>> >>> > >> > so >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> if any >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message, >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can >> >>>> delete it >> >>>> >>> and >> >>>> >>> > >> > report >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> it. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards, >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You >> Liu < >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> zhu424....@gmail.com> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >> >>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. >> >>>> >>> It >> >>>> >>> > >> > appears >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> to be >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> a >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of >> >>>> >>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661 >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> with >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > just >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek >> >>>> Potiuk < >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> ja...@potiuk.com> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from >> >>>> your >> >>>> >>> > account >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> recently. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> If >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you >> >>>> can add >> >>>> >>> a >> >>>> >>> > >> comment >> >>>> >>> > >> > > to >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> an >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before >> >>>> opening a >> >>>> >>> new >> >>>> >>> > >> > ticket. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek >> >>>> Potiuk < >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> ja...@potiuk.com >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw >> >>>> after >> >>>> >>> sending >> >>>> >>> > >> it. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> There is >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters. I >> >>>> hope >> >>>> >>> they >> >>>> >>> > >> will >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> manage >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> to do >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867 >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM >> Vikram >> >>>> Koka >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vik...@astronomer.io.invalid> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek! >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM >> Jarek >> >>>> >>> Potiuk < >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> ja...@potiuk.com> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI >> >>>> generated >> >>>> >>> > >> feature >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> requests >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > for >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow, >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat >> legitimate, >> >>>> with >> >>>> >>> > >> somewhat >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> related >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content, >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense >> >>>> when you >> >>>> >>> read >> >>>> >>> > >> > them. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Some >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples: >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > * >> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858 >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > * >> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856 >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > * >> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854 >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with >> >>>> short >> >>>> >>> > history >> >>>> >>> > >> in >> >>>> >>> > >> > GH >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> not >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND >> >>>> report >> >>>> >>> > >> authors >> >>>> >>> > >> > to >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub - >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the >> AI-generated >> >>>> >>> traffic >> >>>> >>> > >> flood. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J. >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> >>>> >>> > >> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >> >>>> >>> > > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >>> >> >
