Post by @hperrin@lemmy.ca

2026-04-13 02:45 UTC

Yes, that makes sense. People have always been able to intentionally commit copyright infringement. However, it has historically been fairly difficult to unintentionally commit copyright infringement. That’s no longer the case. AI makes it very easy to unintentionally commit copyright infringement. That’s a good reason to ban it outright.

Replies (1)

@anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2026-04-13 04:46

The risk of that is relatively low for kernel contributions, though. Most of the work being done is porting existing protocols/firmware into the latest Linux kernel, not creating novel features. The larger risk is instability caused by *bad, hallucinated* code because it was submitted under the assumption of human authorship. In both cases, further review by the Linux team can be done if they understand where that code is coming from. Banning AI does nothing, because theres no way of knowing who uses it without proper disclosure, which wouldnt happen if it were banned. To use an example from the article, it would be like banning code written with the use of a specific brand of keyboard. Better to have it properly disclosed than to make it illicit

Open ##1123398