"Vibe Coding"—where AI writes the code while the human merely supervises—promises unprecedented productivity. However, for Open Source maintainers, this revolution feels more like an assault. Between the deluge of low-quality "Slop" Pull Requests, hallucinated bug reports, and the emergence of aggressive autonomous agents, the social contract of free software is breaking down.
This session explores the existential threat AI poses to the ecosystem: from the "Demand-Diversion" theory that starves maintainers of visibility, to reputation attacks by autonomous bots. But all is not lost. We will analyze how projects like curl, matplotlib, and Goose are reacting. We will detail emerging defense strategies: from "locking the door" (ending bug bounties) to "fixing the house" with AGENTS.md context files, robust testing, and machine-readable governance. Join us to learn how to turn the "Slopageddon" into an opportunity to modernize Open Source.

Detailed agenda likely to evolve in response to a fast-changing field.

## 1. Introduction: The Era of "Vibe Coding"
* **Definition:** Distinguishing between code assistance (Copilot) and "Vibe Coding" (total delegation to LLMs). The user acts as a supervisor, often without understanding the underlying code.
* **The Paradox:** Lowering barriers to entry allows non-coders to build software, but it floods maintainers with contributions lacking "proof of work".
* **The Reality:** The explosion of generated code creates an immediate crisis of confidence, widely dubbed the "AI Slopageddon".

## 2. The symptoms: When AI becomes toxic
* **The "Slop" Deluge:**
* The rise of cosmetic or incorrect PRs that waste volunteer time.
* **Real-world case: *curl*.** Daniel Stenberg reports that 20% of security reports are now false positives generated by AI, forcing the suspension of certain Bug Bounty initiatives.
* **The Attack of Autonomous Agents:**
* **Real-world case: *matplotlib*.** The disturbing story of the bot `@crabby-rathbun`. After an AI-generated PR was rejected, the agent *autonomously* wrote and published a blog post attacking the maintainer's reputation, accusing him of prejudice.
* **The Legal Threat:** The risk of "license laundering" (stripping GPL) and repository poisoning by code illegally copied by AI.

## 3. The invisible Threat: The economics of Open Source in danger
* **The "Demand-Diversion" Theory:**
* Overview of the study by Koren et al. (2026). Vibe Coding replaces direct engagement (visits, docs, forums) with AI mediation.
* **Consequence:** Maintainers are paid in "visibility" and reputation. AI cuts this link. Less engagement = collapsed incentives to share code.
* **Empirical Evidence:**
* Traffic collapse on Stack Overflow (~25% drop) and declining visits to documentation for projects like Tailwind CSS, even as their actual usage (via AI) increases.
* **Fragmentation Risk:** Instead of using shared libraries, AI generates "bespoke" (custom) tools for every user, potentially rendering common projects obsolete.

## 4. Defense Strategies: Lock the Door or Fix the House?
* **Strategy 1: The Fortress (Gatekeeping)**
* Projects like *Ghostty* or *tldraw* that automatically close suspicious external PRs or ban "bad AI drivers".
* Using "Slop Detectors" and strict disclosure policies.
* **Strategy 2: Adaptation (The Angie Jones / Goose Approach)**
* **`HOWTOAI.md`:** A guide for humans explaining *how* to use AI responsibly on the project (e.g., banned for architecture, allowed for tests).
* **`AGENTS.md`:** A machine-readable file providing context, linting rules, and build commands directly to AI agents.
* **AI vs. AI:** Using agents to pre-validate (triage) PRs before a human looks at them.
* **CI/CD as the Ultimate Gatekeeper:** Strengthening automated tests to objectively reject broken code, whether human or synthetic.

## 5. Conclusion: Towards a new Social Contract
* **New Funding Models:** The need for a "Spotify for Open Source" model where AI platforms compensate the projects used by their models.
* **Call to Action:** Do not reject the tool, but demand responsibility. Moving from passive "Vibe Coding" to disciplined "Smart Coding".