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: <dev@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. > >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > > >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > > >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > >>>> >>> > >> > > >> > >>>> >>> > >> > > > >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>> >>> > >> > >>>> >>> > > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> > >>>> >> > >>>> > >>> >
