The manifesto is somehow devoid of coherent arguments. You are still personally listed as the author of your commits, adding a co-author is not a mechanism for moving all accountability to that co-author. That's not what a co-author is.

I suspect the author of the website forgot to include in their prompt why they actually dislike AI Co-Author attributions. Or maybe they just have really bad colleagues

And that's while there are plenty of good reasons not to list the AI as co-author. I stopped letting Claude include it

Broken on mobile, and clearly written by an AI co-author.

This sounds like Claude from a mile away

“It strikes the tool. It keeps the person. Matching runs on both the display name and the email, normalized — so a renamed bot or a numeric noreply address doesn’t slip through. A human is never in the blast radius.”

AI Co-authors are impressive marketing, but deleterious to dev work.

This manifesto website includes a git commit-msg hook for your favorite hook manager, and a GitHub Action for preventing contributions containing them from landing in your project.

Ironic this website has AI written all over it.

When I read the title, I thought it would be for research papers.

AI can't be accountable therefore AI cannot be the author.

Broken on mobile