So Open-Source and FOSS projects collectively decided that they want to jump on half-sunken ship in the middle of the ocean?
Amazing.
Is it a half sunken ship? I’ve been following AI is software for a while now, even though all signs point to failure and crash, it just keeps going and people adopt it more.
Hot take: LLMs is the best thing has happened to open source movement:
- software copyright is defeated and basically eliminated in practice
- reverse engineering is so accessible that proprietary protocols cannot be hidden and can be reimplemented by AI agents as free software
- open weight LLMs are incredibly competitive and run on general hardware
- linux is de facto winner in all computing and rising in desktop and gaming niches
We’re literally in the golden age of free software
Llms have been great for finding and fixing bugs and cranking out code, but the systems that allow for generation of code at a direct cost of dollars as opposed to the overhead of managing and employing programmers aren’t under the intense pressure to not redo old work and so are disincentivized from either creating or contributing to open source projects.
@drmoose @Grandwolf319 Assuming you place zero value on quality, yeah this is great.
That would be cool and all, but people stopped reading their code. At work if I can not explain every line of my PR, it will get rejected. I use it as a powerful tool but a lot of people just output code and think their trash belongs in production.
Although I agree with you, I had that issue well before AI was a thing:
“I dunno, I just copied it from this StackOverflow post…”
<cut to me raging that someone would do that>
You’re conflating open source and free software with public domain. Open source software licenses are completely dependent on software copyright. This means that if software copyright were eliminated, open source licenses would become completely unenforceable. We may be headed in this direction anyway, but I just thought I would make the point.
It has been wild to see Linux users hope that the GPL is rendered unenforceable.
Why? The entire purpose of GPL is to counteract copyright. If there is no copyright we no longer need GPL either.
The GPL gives you the right to access and modify the source code of software you use. A lack of copyrights does not mean that the creators have to share the source code with you. In fact, it means that anyone can take GPL software and turn it into closed source software
@fruitcantfly @drmoose Just. Wrong. Clearly ‘Linux boosted’ is a worthless accolade.
Copyleft exists only because of copyright. If there is no copyright there’s no longer a need for copyleft.
I completely disagree. What’s the main thing the GPL does that is different from public domain or the complete absence of copyright?
It restricts how the code can be used in order to protect the writers and the consumers of the code. Without copyright and copyleft, any company can use any GPL code in any proprietary product they want, without sharing any of their changes and without even crediting the original writers. As an example, Microsoft could adopt the Linux kernel for Windows, heavily modify it, sell it, and stay completely silent about it, without any consequences. That’s what a world without copyright means for copyleft.
Sure but again this is only a problem if copyright exists. Stallman himself invented GPL due to frustrations of copyright. The permisiveness is default human behavior that was corrupted by evil people and terrible systems. The neutrrance of copyright just returns us to this default state of sharing.
half-sunken ship
If you think the ship is ever sinking I’ve got bad news for you…
They can only burn so much money before investors stop giving it.
Time to learn HolyC and make your own
forkdenomination of TempleOS xD
Fascism is when AI.
How is AI fascist?
Is it ultranationalist? Rejecting democracy? Anticommunist or antiliberal? Third position in economics? Anti egalitarian? Racist? Traditianolist socially?
I could maybe see an argument for it being anti egalitarian, but besides that, LLMs have none of those traits.
You don’t understand… ‘fascism’ today means something along the lines of ‘I don’t like it’, like ‘gay’ in the 90s…
Some of them are owned by fascists but I do agree with you
Most developers using AI/LLMs use corporate owned LLM’s, not local models (and almost certainly never a local model that is trained in a way to not introduce legal plagiarism into a FLOSS project).
Using corporate AI directly helps the financial situations of the big tech companies that host them (by boosting usage/user numbers, they are able to attract more investment capital), most of which are owned by right-wing CEO’s who are more than willing to collaborate with and fund fascist governments to ensure that they are not regulated and receive lucritive government contracts. Many of these companies, such as Nvidia, Palantir and Oracle, genuinely appear to be seeking to use these tools for what would previously be considered crackpot conspiracy theory levels of public control and surveillance.
That’s still not fascism.
Also, your logic is flawed: Some CEOs are right wing, so they would be willing to support fascism (because as we know, right wing = fascism)
In my opinion CEOs of most tech companies are just opurtunistic.
If a corporation helping a fascist government surveil and detain citizens in opposition to the government securing more totalitarian power isn’t fascist then… What would you consider fascist behavior?
This doesn’t mean all corporations are like that
Most are operated by sociopaths and psychopaths.
Assuming it is true, it doesn’t mean that they’re all fascist.
Did you watch it? It compares corporations itself to psychopaths, it’s nowhere said that CEOs/upper management are psychopaths.
Opportunistic people supporting fascism and actual fascist true believers are indistinguishable in how they behave, right? The only difference would be if/when fascism is no longer an opportunity to make money.
The point isn’t so much the quality of the code itself.
The point is that AI is an inefficient power-wasting piece of trash, and the data centres that power it have significant negative impacts on people and the environment, all for the sake of devs being lazy idiots. And you’d have to be an idiot to let AI take away your skills.
The point isn’t so much the speed and comfort of the commute itself.
The point is that a car is an inefficient power-wasting piece of trash, and the oil rigs that power it have significant negative impacts on people and the environment, all for the sake of commuters being lazy idiots. And you’d have to be an idiot to let a car take away your mobility.
This but unironically
Upvoted with the hope that you’re not trying to be ironic
We should all live in caves again, and wipe our butts with a handful of dry leaves.
Dude, no.
The point is also that this is the pre-enshittification version of AI, and any person or system foolish enough to become dependent on it will get exploited to the best of AI companies’ abilities.
pre-enshittification?
Then what the hell are the models Windows is relying on if this is the GOOD stuff?
the opposite of “enshittified” isn’t “good.” some stuff sucks for fresh, new reasons before it enshittifies and turns to full on exploitative rent-seeking.
for example, anthropic quietly pulled claude code from their pro subscriptions and made it a separate subscription. that’s enshittification. and stupid AI bros are gonna fall for it every time.
Oh so it just goes from bad to worse? I see then
Usually in the context of profit milking by shareholders influencing that decline.
If only there were some community of people who valued using free and open source software so we had options that were not dependent on the whims of companies. Then we could have software that we could depend on that isn’t dependent on the whims of corporations.
Throwing out AI because there are AI companies who causing harm is like giving up on Operating Systems because of the plethora of bad acts made by Microsoft.
I agree that everyone should using OpenAI, Anthropic or any of the other companies which were created to spend trillions of dollars buying up all computer hardware on the planet while building fossil fueled datacenters.
That isn’t the same as thinking that the actual machine learning technology itself is somehow inherently bad. There are many open weight models and FOSS projects that lets people use AI without contributing to the capitalist orgy that’s causing all of the secondary harms.
People conflating AI technology and AI companies are failing to diagnose the issue that we’re facing.
Open weight != open source.
You can can inspect open source software. You can compile the source into binary. You cannot inspect open binary. Well, you can, but it’s difficult. Can anyone ever inspect the fucking weights in a useful way? They are just bias numbers.
Exactly! Well said. So many idiots here who think that AI=data center.
And all those AI models where made by requiring these companies and their data centers and their millions of dollars.
And all the cars were made requiring companies with their factories and their millions of dollars. And all the computers. And all the… Everything! WTF is your point?
Yeah, my laptop is totally going to exploit me. I better not get hooked on using it. I’ll just leave it packed up in the box if came in, unplugged from the wall, so it doesn’t get a chance. /s
Good, someone with morals
If they had those, they wouldn’t be wasting electricity by being on the Internet. Causing global warming with their use of technology. They’d be sitting in a cave, meditating to reduce the harm they cause to the environment.
Yet you use a computer, curious! I am very intelligent.
You, too? Nice! That makes two intelligent people.
Want to do something really intelligent together? Like try to enforce a ban on AI even though it’s use is undetectable and fundamentally it’s just math?
you not being able to detect LLM use is not our problem
🤣
You not being able to detect the eye color of someone over the phone is not anyone else’s problem.
That’s a false equivalence. And besides they polute on massivelly different scales
It’s not a false equivalence. You can’t applaud someone ruining the environment to condemn someone ruining the environment. It’s ludicrous.
It’s also not inherently massively different scales. For all you know they posted from a super computer connected to a coal generator, to complain about AI being operated on a Raspberry Pi powered by solar.
Then you clearly have no idea what a false equivalence is
That’s a false equivalence.
So what does this mean for users?
Is fedora going to get worse now?
debian maintainer resigns
Is fedora gonna get worse?
Did you even read the dann blog post?
Great. So what distro should I be using now?
According to this list, here are the distros that actively reject AI/LLM contributions:
- Asahi Linux - https://asahilinux.org/docs/project/policies/slop/
- Chimera Linux - https://gts.chimera-linux.org/@chimera/statuses/01KK78VSB4G5S75STYEY3YTR2H
- Elementary - https://docs.elementary.io/contributor-guide/development/generative-ai-policy
- Gentoo - https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council/AI_policy
- NetBSD - https://www.netbsd.org/developers/commit-guidelines.html
- PostmarketOS - https://docs.postmarketos.org/policies-and-processes/development/ai-policy.html
- Redox OS - https://gitlab.redox-os.org/redox-os/redox/-/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#ai-policy
I’ve found that AntiX also rejects AI usage based on a conversation about it in their forum, but they are based on Debian, so…
There’s also this list with a few more not listed in the first.
The one you want.
Ignore the ignorant purity test of the outrage junkies. Half of the ‘people’ stirring shit on this topic are probably LLMs themselves.
AI is a technology.
The rampant investment into that technology by capital and the market manipulations and fraud are the dangerous thing to societal stability. It’s the trillions of dollars poured into the technology in an attempt to buy a monopoly which is generating all of the secondary effects that people are complaining about.
People are, I’d argue intentionally, confusing the two things. The Western AI Industry is bad but it is a separate thing from machine learning technologies.
Pretending that the entire technology is bad because a bunch of people with infinite wallets are destroying the economy and ecosystem in order to make profits is ignorant.
Trying to paint every project, person or group that uses AI with the same brush as the people who are creating all of the negative effects is misdirecting anger away from the people making the decisions and blaming a technology.
Initially sent to debian-private, shared here because I want the consequences of Debian fully embracing fascist-backed technology to be known.
That seems to be a bit far reached and naive. Hopefully Antoine isn’t driving cars, because there are several brands that were supported by Nazi’s at one time in the past.
Besides that, I think it is good to have a discussion about the use or LLM. I just think that the reason here is a bit unusual.
because there are several brands that were supported by Nazi’s at one time in the past.
The AI’s that most people use support fascists in the present.
Surveillence is not fascist.
Do most people use nemotron models?
When the surveillance is being sold to fascist governments to identify, suppress and imprison dissidents, it is fascist.
The German Nazis stored people data on Hollerith punch cards supplied by US company IBM.
https://ahrp.org/30999-2/So maybe you should’ve started with that as your argument?
Same goes for PayPal, and yet everybody keeps using it. Not saying that this is a reason to use Frontier models. But calling the whole technology fascist is simply not true.
That’s what a fascist would say
Brain rot comparison.
Buying a car does nothing to support fascists from the 1940s. Meanwhile paying meta/google etc or using their products directly funds their influence campaigns to hide crimes against humanity taking place every day.
So what is your suggestion? Where do you draw the line? Because obviously it is not just about LLM.
[https://www.zdnet.com/article/top-6-ai-free-linux-distros/](This article did not age well at all.)
Everything will be infested eventually.
Even if Datacenters fall and tokens are expensive AF, there are enough accessible models that the cat isn’t going back into the bag.
Humans are … opportunistic. If most can do a half-assed job for almost no effort and get by, they will.
I’m not an AI evangelist but I am open-minded. I think Debian’s decision is balanced, and more importantly realistic.
There’s a difference between vibe coding and using AI to improve productivity. I’m a dev and pretty much everyone I know is using AI in some way. Yes they’ll lose contributors initially but Debian would lose more in the long run if they’d outright banned it.
For all those who are saying ‘AI supports fascists’ - the most popular models right now are Chinese. Very oppressive and paranoid government but definitely not fascist.
For all those that say ‘AI causes global warming’ - you’re correct, but unless you’ve got your own solar panels, so does your non-AI gaming rig. And your gas-driven car.
I disagree. You are an AI evangelist and quite closed-minded. Having a “balanced” approach, if there was one, would be to label any AI usage explicitly. If you’re afraid to label your AI usage, you’re a fucking coward.
But, damn, let’s not blame the billion dollar data centers for global warming, guys! It’s the individual decisions you make every day that kills the planet! If you believe this, the AI has fried your brain. It’s not one authoritarian government, it’s a different one! Actual paste-eating behavior. My work has improved with LLM usage! A common saying from people who were not good at their job, and are somehow now worse without them realizing it.
Any decent developer I have found has hated LLMs because they do not work anywhere near as well as people who are shit at things think they do. Personally, I don’t really like smashing the Skinner Box button hoping the output works this time because I like programming, and having Claude rape my codebase seems like a bad idea to me if I ever want to go back in there. But, then again, I like knowing how my code works, so maybe I should just lobotomize myself and I’ll understand why you like it so much.
Wow. You know, it is possible to have a discussion and even disagree with people without being a nasty peice of work?
I don’t have discussions with people that think the problem behind LLMs with high energy and water usage is that people use cars too much. Literally no one wants to subsidize their fucking local data center. Plus, you definitely ALSO use a car, so you’re not even better than the people you are trying to criticize because ChatGPT has rotted that portion of your brain from disuse. Frankly, I’ll be a nasty piece of work if it gets it through your thick fucking skull that AI is shit, most people know it’s shit, and you are likely shittier at everything you do using it. But, sure, complain about my tone, and never my message, because all you AI bros get so fucking butthurt by anyone saying anything bad about AI. Just call me a Luddite already or whatever and then go cry in your AI discord.
I don’t have discussions with people that think the problem behind LLMs with high energy and water usage
I didn’t say I didn’t think that was a problem, I was highlighting the hypocracy around it all.
Plus, you definitely ALSO use a car
Actually I dont. I dont own or use a car. My primary mode of transport is my own two legs.
so you’re not even better than the people you are trying to criticize
I didn’t say I was, you’re drawing conclusions based on what I haven’t said.
Frankly, I’ll be a nasty piece of work if it gets it through your thick fucking skull that AI is shit, most people know it’s shit, and you are likely shittier at everything you do using it.
You seem to think you’re some hero and doing the world a favour but you’re behaving like an opinionated bully. You are by far the vilest person I have encountered on here.
Even if every single fucking person on earth stopped driving their fucking car, global warming wouldn’t fucking stop because the vast majority of it is corporations’ fault, and those data centers are a major contributor to that. But subsidizing your lack of carbon footprint by using an LLM is a weird fucking flex, I guess. You were the one that brought up how using an LLM is like using a car, so sounds like you do care about that. But, sure, highlight the major pollution issues and not the fucking over poor people who have to subsidize your LLMs water and energy usage. My car didn’t make you pay double for your water bill like an asshole.
I think it’s helpful to separate the problems of the technology itself from all the BS that big tech companies engage in when developing and pushing it.
Say you only use small, open-weight models that are hosted locally in a data center that is conscientious, environmentally clean, has strict data privacy policies and doesn’t pull the bullshit big-tech do.
You use them minimally and responsibly, you don’t over-rely on them. Is there a problem in that case?
You use them minimally and responsibly, you don’t over-rely on them. Is there a problem in that case?
Responsibly is the key word there. I.e. vibe-coding an entire project full of security risks without understanding the architecture or languages used. Vs. using LLMs to error check code, brainstorm a project, write code you feel confident you can review yourself.
Also, like you say, hosting locally. Or using a provider like Mistral that is European, not evil, uses France’s abundant nuclear power…
There is no such thing as Responsibly if there is no disclosure.
I sort-of agree, but what are you disclosing?
If a project on github was 100% vibe coded with no (initial) human review - I’d want to know that.
If a project was 60% hand coded, 40% vibes but reviewed by a human … yeah in the interests of openness it doesn’t hurt to disclose that.
If a project was 100% hand cranked but checked by an LLM? If its open source I’m not sure I need to know that.
If a project was 100% hand cranked and human-reviewed, is open source but the dev used an LLM to keep a to do list of tasks… no I don’t need to know that.
And like someone else pointed out - how exactly do you verify that AI was not used at all for any part of a project?
Also, you know Microsoft will be vibe-coding its products. Would that stop you using Windows, Xbox, M365 etc?
For all those that say ‘AI causes global warming’ - you’re correct, but unless you’ve got your own solar panels, so does your non-AI gaming rig. And your gas-driven car.
so fucking what? stop trying unless you’re perfect? every bit helps! fuck you
You’re vegan too, I presume, since animal agriculture is one of the largest contributors to global warming?
all of agriculture is only like 1/5 of our emissions, and we need to eat.
Animal agriculture contributes between 10-20% of total ghg emissions, depending on the estimate.
The entire digital economy footprint, including AI and all internet infrastructure, is less than 4% of global emissions.
https://www.climatiq.io/blog/measure-greenhouse-gas-emissions-carbon-data-centres-cloud-computing
But sure, AI is the problem we should be focusing on.
I haven’t said anything about AI.
but that Xu et al 2021 paper has some dubious methodology. the conclusions might be correct but the methodology can’t prove it.
What is the issue with the methodology exactly? In any case, the lower end of estimates is still twice the emissions of all of the digital economy. We would do more for climate change going vegan than we would fighting data centers.
I mentioned AI because that is the topic of the thread we are in.
well I skimmed specifically for lca study combinations, and found them quickly. that invalidates all the data. if I read further, who knows what else i might find
open fire, he’s reaching!
no i’m not, but i have been reducing my meat intake a lot, because of global warming and ethical issues.
You typed this from a machine you know is causing global warming, hypocrite. That’s what.
That only works if you ignore the difference in scale.
My backyard campfire also adds CO2 to the atmosphere, but that doesn’t make the corporations any less responsible. They account for the supermajority of CO2 greenhouse gas emissions.
so fucking what? stop trying unless you’re perfect? every bit helps! fuck you
yeah, fuck you, specifically
Thanks. Fuck you specifically, too!
Now get off the Internet, you’re harming the environment with your electricity usage.
pro AI asshoe says what
Every little bit helps, sure. But maybe it’s just me, wondering why you’re getting so upset at the small contributors on some random Internet forum.
From the outside, you look like you just want to find things to be upset at.
In my experience, you find what you go looking for.
A PC causes far less global warming than an AI datacenter. Like, it’s not even comparable.
so fucking what? stop trying unless you’re perfect? every bit helps! fuck you
Why don’t you start by turning off your device?
Exactly!
(You missed that my reply was a copy/paste of the comment I was roasting, and you have just given me the answer I gave them, which lead to your responding to me. The circle is complete, ad nauseum.)
what do you expect people to do? go full kaczynski and live in a cabin in the woods? and if that’s not acceptable for the person, they might as well burn down the amazon cause that’s basically the same anyway?
are you okay? are you having some mental issues? there are people that can help you.
this extreme black/white thinking combined with a defeatist attitude can’t be healthy in the long term, for you or the rest of the planet
No, that’s exactly what I’m trying to highlight. This person is criticizing others for using technology/electricity, while doing the exact same thing themselves. It’s hypocritical. There’s nothing that can be done until the system itself changes. Criticizing others does both but highlight the fact that you’re an idiot who is falling for the propaganda to keep people fighting amongst themselves, rather than targeting the system itself.
you’re doing a horrible job, might wanna rethink your methods
No one is paying me for this job, and it’s doomed to fail. It’s like yelling into the void. Whether I do it at one decibel level or another, the outcome is identical.
Oh go suck some fucking Billionaires dick some more. Maybe one day you’ll be good enough and get that trickle down.
Moron. Can’t tell the difference between a laptop and a data center.
very oppressive and paranoid, bit definitely not fascist.
That is … an interesting take, especially taking the Uyghur genocide into account.
Fascism is far-right. China is sort-of Communist, which is far-left.
Thus China is not fascist. Still a brutal, oppressive borderline-genocidal regime, but not fascist.
Communism is just a label very easy to roleplay for control (see: .ml).
China is authoritarian, and that’s sort of the problem. That’s why the US is bad, bozo. But, sure, why don’t we point out all the definitely not capitalism that China is doing so you can pretend that all those Uyghurs aren’t being genocided, nor that the AI surveillance state they’ve got going on to censor and disappear people. Damn, dude, I’m glad I can pick between these two shitty governments.
Not a genocide. No mass killings. Pure propaganda pushed by a CIA plant named Adrian Zenz. (You should look into him; he’s a religious zealot who believes his Agency-promoted investigation is a mission from God.) The UN’s own report from 2022 never uses the word genocide. https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/08/1125932
It is an anti-radicalization education program put in place because the CIA was arming and training groups of Uyghurs with the intent of creating terrorist cells, just like they’ve done in bunches of other countries.
The word “genocide” should never be used lightly. What Israel is doing to the people of occupied Palestine? That’s a genocide.
Also, a ban without control isn’t a ban. And making sure that not a single line of code was writen with the help of some AI seems more than complicated… is it just possible?
And how much working time would it take to audit all packages to make sure it is 100% wrote by some human?
It seems more realistic (and more honnest) to allow the part that would not be found by a reasonable audit of the code.
Who said 100% was the goal? We don’t ever have 100% guaranteed exploit free code, or 100% guaranteed spyware free code, etc. The point is you send a message and try your best if you think those are worthwhile goals to attain.
The people saying “but we can’t possibly stop all usage, so why try” aren’t being pragmatic; imo they’re giving up. My assumption is because they don’t want to confront the nasty externalities of their own ai use.
The same could be said of a lot of technologies that enable greater corporate capture at the expense of the environment and overall human wellbeing—and we should be doing something about those as well.
I agree with you, and from my understanding (which could be inaccurate) the position of debian is to avoid a part of the use of that technology they judge both wrong and avoidable.
My own nasty use of AI is mostly to find back the name or syntaxe of functions I seldom use, and sometimes to explain me some theorical points. I admit it is wrong and only spares me only a few hours a week at most compared to stack overflow and online tutorials.
And my laziness would probably make me accept the existance of one model that would be a public property democraticaly controled ; which would consume less ressources than having many concurrents, and avoid the profit-oriented and corporate mindsets (I imagine them being the main source of threat)…
Oh I’m not perfect so everything bad is OK argument. Like we need at this time to be burning more fossil fuels.
Right? We should all shut off our computers at once, and never turn them on again. That will fix it!
Agreed. I think they should have pushed for stronger disclosure requirements, but I also realise that isn’t actually enforceable.
I also find it very telling that people will talk about the negative parts of AI, but not acknowledge other automation tools that perpetuate the same problems. My experience is that most people’s complaints have a real basis, but they are just mis-diagnosed.
The problems seem to be our economic and societal structures, and AI is the new fancy tool that exacerbates those problems. But I’ve not heard a good reason why AI itself is that problem.
and the death blow is when more like-minded developers do the same… there won’t be enough left that would vote to change policy to try to lure some back.
Didn’t we have the same outrage and series of rage-quitting when SystemD was introduced?
Difference is, Systemd wasn’t specifically being used to facilitate fascist governments surveiling their populace or contribute to global warming like LLMs are.
Systemd wasn’t specifically being used to facilitate fascist governments surveiling their populace or contribute to global warming like LLMs are.
Well systemd does require electricity to run, so unless you’ve got your own solar panels its probably contributing to global warming in its own little way.
And the biggest models today are Chinese. Terribly oppressive and paranoid government but not fascist.
UhM aCkShUaLlY sYsTeMd DOES uSe ElEcTrIcItY, ChEcKmAte
Well, it is true 😅
Actual clown.
This motherfucker tries to pretend he’s not an AI evangelist and types shit like this.
Looks like I better start learning OpenBSD ASAP. I really like my distro of choice, but if the distro it’s based off of is shooting itself in the foot, I have to switch over massive ethical concerns!
Second I find out I can put a second drive in my desktop, I plan on using it to learn to make something a lot less hostile to the actual people helping develop the OS. And OpenBSD sounds like a fun choice for now… at least until I find they have started betraying the actual people.
It’s a desktop, there should be sufficient space to fit more than one drive. You can also use external drives. I use three on my server.
If you’re worried about LLM generated code you better stop using computers all together.
Return to monke. Literally.
Or maybe just get off the grid
No, I am worried about idiots committing llm generated code straight into production without even bothering to review it
So you will check the development process or each project you use? Good luck with that.
So I will drop any project that goes nuts before they get a chance to fuck up my life or work
I’d rather spend my time using technology to spread the word that the creatures who use genAI can become human again through reeducation against genAI. Sounds much more productive.
Sure, just accept you will be using technology build with genAI.
Not much of an issue with that, I feel.
I can tell you for sure that the workers and the farmers did not own the pitchforks nor the materials for the guillotines with which they rebelled against their oppressors.
From what I understand, while OpenBSD is currently not accepting LLM contributions, they mostly made that choice out of legal copyright concerns, and seem like they would jump on the bandwagon when they consider it to be safer legally.
Then I hope now for it to never become legally safe to use LLM code. LLMs have poisoned literally everything pure and holy and I hate them for it!
NetBSD is also worth a look, especially with the MicroVM kernel stuff in 11. You can look at smolBSD to start playing with it immediately.
“AI scrapers break the web, to use this page you’ll need JavaScript enabled.”
The ironic…
come to devuan
Devuan has made no official statements on their stance about LLM use. Until they do, it is not known if they would be a safe haven or not.
The only debian based distro that has publicly taken a stand against LLM/AI’s is AntiX linux.
Noo! Come to devutwo!
I use arch btw.
Well what would the disclosure requirement improve? It’s unenforceable and it just gets in the way of evaluating the code based on quality. Every code should have high standards. Bad llm code is just as bad as bad human code.
If a project allows llm contributions then disclosing it will only make people weary of the wrong things. Putting a badge on it is not helpful anymore if it’s allowed. I have seen good llm code and bad human code.
What wrong things?
Bad llm code is just as bad as bad human code.
Bad LLM code is worse than bad human code. LLMs sanitize out markers that humans use to catch and correct mistakes.
I have experienced both.
The Free Software Foundation of Europe recently published an article detailing why it’s legally quite important for developers to disclose and carefully catalog which code was created by LLMs.
https://fsfe.org/news/2026/news-20260825-01.html
Recommendations for AI usage in Free Software contributions
With these issues in mind, the recently published Recommendations When Using LLM-Backed Generative AI Systems for FOSS Contributions by the SFC outlines some of the legal difficulties for copyright and licensing that generative systems have created for software developers who wish to write, maintain, or contribute to Free Software projects.
Notably for the purposes of this article, the SFC recommends the full recording and disclosure of how and when an AI tool was used to assist in the creation of a contribution. As stated by the SFC:
“FOSS project leaders cannot make good decisions about LLM-gen-AI policy if they cannot survey which contributions were assisted, and how much they are assisted. Part of the contribution process should (at least) include a disclosure of what LLM-gen-AI system was used, its version (as these system change over time), and a brief description of how the system assisted the contributor. This information should be included in a machine-readable format in commit logs."
Indeed, such disclosure can be an important foundational step to allow for the accurate assessment of the copyrightability of code that has been assisted or generated by AI tools, in order to assess their licensability into Free Software. Open and clear disclosure is a helpful step for the Free Software community to maintain a healthy licensing ecosystem, which is currently threatened by the legal uncertainties that come with the advent of generative AI.
Additionally, it is worthwhile for developers to document in some capacity the extent of human work that they have done in their software projects, whether it be the writing of code, the selection and arrangement of components within the project, or the extent of human modification of machine generated content.
IANAL but from my naive perspective it might make more sense to not disclose this because no one can prove that something was written by AI if no one discloses it. That means for me that any claims that a certain part cannot be copyrighted are hard or even impossible to make.
Code is a liability. The only thing that balances it out is people who understand the code. The people are the asset.
If you contribute LLM-generated code but not your understanding, you’ve essentially taken out a loan in the maintainers’ names.
Not only the contributor has to understand code. There have always been flyby contributers that just add their code and that’s it. So if a PR adds code that cannot be maintained by others it can’t be added. That is part of the review process. That is part of evaluating based on quality. It’s unimportant if a human or an llm wrote something unmaintainable.
Building tech debt you never pay down is the way you kill open source projects.
FYI it’s wary. Weary means you’re tired. Wary is to beware of something.
