Conversation (100)
Showing 16 of 100 cached locally.
84 comments are reported by the remote server but not cached here yet Sign in to load more
Open reply 
Amju Wolf
@amju_wolf@pawb.social · Aug 29
Thread reply
I disagree. For one, it’s unenforceable, just like outright banning it.
But AI assistance can also mean a lot of different things, from outright vibecoding through autocomplete up to only asking it to so review. It diminishes the human work in the eyes of other people, because a simple disclaimer doesn’t distinguish between the work done, and also encourages people to point out to AI as a scapegoat for their mistakes.
Good code always was and should always be one where a human is fully responsible for it; if you decide to vibecode and happens to end up with perfect code, good; if you write it fully yourself but it’s crap it doesn’t absolve you that you didn’t use AI…
It’s a tool, so use it responsibly like any other tool and stand behind your code no matter what tools you used.
Open reply 
atopi
@atopi@piefed.blahaj.zone · Aug 29
Thread reply
I disagree. For one, it’s unenforceable, just like outright banning it.
If people thought “its impossible to catch everyone so why bother trying to catch anyone at all” when making laws, no laws would exist
Open reply
Amju Wolf
@amju_wolf@pawb.social · Sep 02
Thread reply
There’s a difference between “not being able to catch everyone” and having effectively no way to catch anyone.
And yes, unfortunately there are plenty of laws with the same issue (especially here and in the past decade or two) and it sucks - it only teaches people to ignore rules and a lot of them make you a criminal for no reason.
Open reply
Amju Wolf
@amju_wolf@pawb.social · Sep 02
Thread reply
…elaborate? Anything that’s actually reliable?
Open reply
Amju Wolf
@amju_wolf@pawb.social · Sep 02
Thread reply
So just declare how you used the tool?
That can quickly get complicated, and more importantly noone does that.
People who want to do it generally. Just call for a “metadata tag” in the commit.
The thing is, what are you actually trying to achieve with this disclosure? How does it help you?
If you’re going to treat AI assisted code the same way you treat human code (with a ton of scrutiny - which you absolutely should), then what is the point?
Do you also want to know what IDE was used, which autocomplete engine, or what OS?
Open reply
Amju Wolf
@amju_wolf@pawb.social · Sep 15
Thread reply
For example because you want to be kudged for the actual code you submit and not the tools you use to create it by people biased against certain tools.
Open reply 
tinsukE
@tinsuke@lemmy.world · Aug 29
Alright, what are the alternatives folks?
Gentoo? Gentoo!
(But I’ll keep watch to see of they don’t revert course because “the models are now too powerful”, since it is a policy from 2024)
The policy
Gentoo Council has voted on 2024-04-14 on the following policy:
It is expressly forbidden to contribute to Gentoo any content that has been created with the assistance of Natural Language Processing artificial intelligence tools. This motion can be revisited, should a case be made for such a tool that does not pose copyright, ethical and quality concerns.
This policy affects Gentoo contributions and the official Gentoo projects. It does not prohibit adding packages for AI-related software or software that is being developed with the help of such tools upstream.
wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council/AI_policy
Open reply 
coltn
@coltn@lemmy.ml · Aug 31
Thread reply
chimera-linux chimera-linux.org/community/#project-ai-policy
Chimera has a strong no-AI policy for contributions in all of its repositories. Contributors found using LLMs will be barred from further contributing to the project.
We take objection against the use of LLMs primarily on ethical grounds. This is based on many factors, including societal impact of LLM use, ecological impact, and others. We reject arguments about “useful tools” and similar, because technical aspects can never be considered in isolation.
LLM-using contributions additionally have a disproportionate burden on reviewers, their mental health, as well as project resources, which we have limited amounts of.
Chimera is a small project and has limited control over what upstreams do, particularly due to dependencies and widespread use of LLM usage in projects nowadays. We try to do the right thing when possible, preferring appropriate alternatives and so on.