On 2025/11/11 03:02 PM, bonkmaykr via tde-users wrote:

I agree with him. Actually, I am willing to clean it up myself if time allows. It's not like it's very detailed.

Thanks all for bringing this up. And yes, I guess it went unnoticed :-( If someone or the original contributor wants to clean it up and submit a refined version of it, we will be happy to take a look at it. Cheers Michele

Anno domini 2026 Fri, 6 Mar 15:52:56 +0900 Michele Calgaro via tde-users scripsit:

On 2025/11/11 08:24 PM, Michele Calgaro wrote:

...

On 2025/11/11 03:02 PM, bonkmaykr via tde-users wrote:

...

I agree with him. Actually, I am willing to clean it up myself if time allows. It's not like it's very detailed.

Thanks all for bringing this up. And yes, I guess it went unnoticed :-( If someone or the original contributor wants to clean it up and submit a refined version of it, we will be happy to take a look at it. Cheers   Michele

Hi everyone, we are approaching the end of the development cycle for R14.1.6 release. IS there any volunteer to work on improving the Flying Konqi wallpaper? The original author has not responded and if no one else is willing to work on it, we will remove it soon. Thanks Michele

When is 14.1.6 sheduled to be released? I'm asking 'cause I just wanted to release an update of "darkness", but it might be a good thing to wait.

My 2¢: just remove the wallpapwer, it's not 1995 any more :)

Nik

...

Hi folks.

I was reading the release notes for R14.1.5 before I started a system upgrade and noticed there was a new wallpaper added to tdeartwork. At first, I liked it, but then I took a closer look and was extremely disappointed. Do we not have any quality control for TDE artwork? I'm certainly not the only one who noticed how bad this looks.

I have no issue with using AI for artwork, but this is embarassing. There was very clearly no attempt to polish or improve this at all. How did this make it in? Surely we can do better than this, no?

Thanks, Nick

Hi all,

we have taken note that the new Flying Konqi wallpaper has some imperfections and probably some AI-based sloppiness, things that had unfortunately not been spotted during the initial development review. We value the feedback given and have asked the original author to rework the wallpaper to enhance its quality to an acceptable level. Should this not happen, we will remove the wallpaper for the R14.1.6 release. So far there has been no response from the original author, so if anyone else wants to have a go at improving the wallpaper, they are welcome.

Cheers Michele

On 2025-11-11 01:35:40 Thierry de Coulon via tde-users wrote:

On Tuesday 11 November 2025 06:37:57 Wirlaburla via tde-users wrote:

...

I was reading the release notes for R14.1.5 before I started a system upgrade and noticed there was a new wallpaper added to tdeartwork. At first, I liked it, but then I took a closer look and was extremely disappointed.

Never cared for these things, I use pictures (my pictures...=.

I agree. I have also always been bemused by DE reviews that base at least part of their ratings on the DE's wallpaper!

Leslie

Here's my take: Don't like it, use a different one. I don't see any imperfections you're talking about or even any signs it was AI-generated.

On Tuesday 02 December 2025 11:36:52 am jacobheinrich--- via tde-users wrote:

I feel like the main concern is that going forward, were going allow more low quality PRs made by these tools with no QA... Are code PRs going to be made and accepted by people who didn't even know what the AI was doing?

This was exactly the point I was trying hard to convey, but I felt as if it was dismissed or ignored.

As I said, I don't have a problem with AI as long as you put in the effort to make it look good (or in the case of code, actually work).

If I squint as if I got assaulted with bear mace, I also intact don't see

any imperfections. I feel myself using this as an insult in the future.

Thanks, Nick

Hey Michele,

Sorry if it seemed like I was trying to say anything was getting worse, or that this mistake has extended into bad code getring into the project. That wasn't my intention at all.

I think AI is pretty cool. But inherently it creates trust between the user and itself, and this trust creates a situation where the user starts to blindly accept the output of the AI.

I don't think the use of it should be blocked, but perhaps a clear cut policy where if AI was used, the contributer should be transparent about it. This way, the time could be taken for more human verification to take place? The only reason I mention this, is because I see multiple projects being slammed with PRs of code written by new contributors, where the contributor neither knew how the code worked, or if the code actually worked at all.... Because they never wrote it.