Debian is polling its developers on whether to permit or ban "AI" contributions.
-
I think you also cannot compare code with vegan. And meat wirh AI.
AI is more like Drugs. That would be the more appropriate comparison. And we all know from drug politics, that, if you forbid to consume it, it becomes illegal and moves to the undergroud. And becomes a worse problem.
Where drugs are legal, controlled and treated with a good health support, drug use became less.
I am sure AI use is like a drug. And becomes worse the more you ban it.
@pelle And if you see AI like a drug, you need to ban the meth lab. Not the user. Baning LLM use is like a social media ban for young people. Or chat control. It never helped if users were banned.
The problem is the vendors who provide the AI services. And I am very convinced that the only way to nail this is a very strong and powerful tool which can strongly support admins and maintainers with low overhead to spot ugly code.
Then only usefuls candidates need review.
-
-
@RueNahcMohr @lproven The trouble with LLM code in a project like debian is simple, deep, and obvious.
If someone is using an LLM instead of learning, providing official feedback to the LLM instead of growing, and providing the LLM's reply to the feedback instead of engaging...
You're not training the next generation of developers. You're training a model.
@Longplay_Games @RueNahcMohr @lproven you are missing the fact, that when learning yourself, tradcoding, expanding understanding, you also contribute to llms, even more i would say: your output is a compost for them and it makes them stronger. no license or ban will prevent it. until it's acked, there can't be an effective solution. and solution will be much more radical than Stallman was in the 80ties, i predict.
