ntfy.sh v2.18.0 was written by AI
-
Ugh, seriously? Great...
(Edit) I don't think this is true? They use Mozilla's push services, but nothing about their Codeberg repo (yes, it's on Codeberg, not Github) indicates they're part of Mozilla.
Read the README
-
I've never used ntfy.sh
I've only used Ntfy app for Universal Push that some apps need, and they recommend ntfy. Does this affect the app then? Ah, if so, what alternative can I use for just that purpose?
Gotify is probably the next best thing, at least in terms of self hosted. Though doesn’t have the wide support of ntfy.
-
Oh goddamn it, I'm using this and don't have an alternative lined up
If using ntfy for UnifiedPush: https://unifiedpush.org/users/distributors/
-
Do you know any? I've never really looked beyond ntfy.sh until now
If you use ntfy for UnifiedPush: https://unifiedpush.org/users/distributors/
-
Sigh. Time to switch to gotify
been using EMQX plus an MQTT client on my phone for a few months now, I like it better than gotify since the app was chewing through my battery like a vampire.
it might be better now since my issues happened three-ish years ago.
-
According to the release:
Adds experimental PostgreSQL support
The code was written by Cursor and Claude
14,997 added lines of code, and 10,202 lines removed
reviewed and heavily tested over 2-3 weeks
This makes me uneasy, especially as ntfy is an internet facing service. I am now looking for alternatives.
Am I overreacting or do you all share the same concern?
Lot of hate for a project maintained by a volunteer and offered for free here. Nobody forces this free stuff on you.
-
the linux kernel is on that list, bro it's time to switch!
Also Chrome, Firefox ans Ladybird!
-
Well, Telegram does the something for free.
Telegram does the thing for your sweet juicy data
-
Ugh, seriously? Great...
(Edit) I don't think this is true? They use Mozilla's push services, but nothing about their Codeberg repo (yes, it's on Codeberg, not Github) indicates they're part of Mozilla.
The app itself might be fine, but you are either using the Mozilla services or the backend written by Mozilla. Sadly Mozilla has lost all the good will it had and is just another silicon valley AI company these days, and seems to prefer it that way.
-
According to the release:
Adds experimental PostgreSQL support
The code was written by Cursor and Claude
14,997 added lines of code, and 10,202 lines removed
reviewed and heavily tested over 2-3 weeks
This makes me uneasy, especially as ntfy is an internet facing service. I am now looking for alternatives.
Am I overreacting or do you all share the same concern?
ts getting you pinned to 2.17 in the compose file 🥹
-
I think there's room for a little bit of nuance that page doesn't do a great job of describing. In my opinion there's a huge difference between volunteer maintainers using AI PR checks as a screening measure to ease their review burden and focusing their actual reviews on PRs that pass the AI checks, and AI-deranged lone developers flooding the code with "AI features" and slopping out 10kloc PRs for no obvious reason.
Just because a project is using AI code reviews or has an AGENTS.md is not necessarily a red flag. A yellow flag, maybe, but the evidence that the Linux Kernel itself is on that list should serve as an example of why you can't just kneejerk anti-AI here. If you know anything about Linus Torvalds you know he has zero tolerance for bad code, and the use of AI is not going to change that despite everyone's fears. If it doesn't work out, Linus will be the first one to throw it under the bus.
Upvote this guy
-
It looks like that tool is more or less built by a single developer (you already trust their judgment anyways!), and even though the code came through in a single PR it was a merge from a branch that had 79 separate commits: https://github.com/binwiederhier/ntfy/pull/1619
Also glancing through it a bit, huge portions of that are straightforward refactors or even just formatting changes caused by adding a new backend option.
I'm not going to say it's fine, but they didn't just throw Claude at a problem and let it rewrite 25k lines of code unnecessarily.
Any AI usage immediately discredits the software for me, because it calls into question all of their past and future work.
-
Read the README
-
The app itself might be fine, but you are either using the Mozilla services or the backend written by Mozilla. Sadly Mozilla has lost all the good will it had and is just another silicon valley AI company these days, and seems to prefer it that way.
Sure. All I said was that it doesn't actually seem to be run by Mozilla, like you implied it was.
-
Any AI usage immediately discredits the software for me, because it calls into question all of their past and future work.
Oh boy, do I have bad news about 90% of the internet for you...
-
the linux kernel is on that list, bro it's time to switch!
Time to switch to Plan9!
-
I think there's room for a little bit of nuance that page doesn't do a great job of describing. In my opinion there's a huge difference between volunteer maintainers using AI PR checks as a screening measure to ease their review burden and focusing their actual reviews on PRs that pass the AI checks, and AI-deranged lone developers flooding the code with "AI features" and slopping out 10kloc PRs for no obvious reason.
Just because a project is using AI code reviews or has an AGENTS.md is not necessarily a red flag. A yellow flag, maybe, but the evidence that the Linux Kernel itself is on that list should serve as an example of why you can't just kneejerk anti-AI here. If you know anything about Linus Torvalds you know he has zero tolerance for bad code, and the use of AI is not going to change that despite everyone's fears. If it doesn't work out, Linus will be the first one to throw it under the bus.
Lol my project has an AGENTS.md and its contents are basically, "Don't use AI agents on this codebase."
-
Oh boy, do I have bad news about 90% of the internet for you...
Linus sent an email recently to the Kernel Mailing List trashing AI slop and rejecting AI generated patches. The fact that he used it to play around with a script doesn't invalidate the fact that he distrusts code written by LLMs when it actually matters.
-
Classic "test in production" strategy, very solid!
Consider a donation to help people providing you the open source software you seem to depend upon.
Usage of a helper tool to perform tasks on code whether it is AI or the IDE internal features can reduce the work load of benevolent developers who has not asked you to use their softwares.
Maybe the language was not appropriate but get real. With the little revenue generated by the usage of people complaining, the use of AI agentic coding might be the only way to bring features without pushing benevolent devs to burnout.
Edit: to bring, not to being!
-
Linus sent an email recently to the Kernel Mailing List trashing AI slop and rejecting AI generated patches. The fact that he used it to play around with a script doesn't invalidate the fact that he distrusts code written by LLMs when it actually matters.
you mean this statement? https://www.theregister.com/2026/01/08/linus_versus_llms_ai_slop_docs/?td=rt-3a
If yes, your statement does not really match what Linus said.
