Ian Jackson <[email protected]> writes: > A human who generated huge volumes of output much of which was > technically incorrect should be referred to CT or DAM. The GR says > someone is responsible and accountable for the DFSG Team's LLM setup > too. So who, hypothetically, should we refer to CT or DAM ? > > This is a conduct violation. It's not just a disagreement about the > merits of LLMs. We had a vote, and what the DFSG Team are doing is a > gross violation of the decision in that vote.
Thank you, Ian, this is a coherent and well-considered expression of many of the issues with the unreliable LLM output generated for NEW queue entries and sent to maintainers. One thing this argues for, is to turn it off for everyone by default, until they positively consent to opt in for this treatment. -- \ “A hundred times every day I remind myself that […] I must | `\ exert myself in order to give in the same measure as I have | _o__) received and am still receiving” —Albert Einstein | Ben Finney
