On Thu, 19 Feb 2026 at 10:59, Sean Whitton <[email protected]> wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum [19/Feb 10:14am +01] wrote:
> > I believe we should focus on what is desirable specifically for the
> > Debian project. We should agree to disagree on AI in general, and
> > instead focus on how we can work together despite that disagreement.
> >
> > I don't want to rush things, but I also don't think that it's useful to
> > spend a lot of time rehashing arguments.
>
> I agree with you that now is probably an appropriate time to start
> trying to find a way for us to agree to disagree wrt LLMs.
>
> I don't understand your point that the specific technology does not
> matter, because the LLM-sceptics are concerned with the specifics of how
> LLMs, in particular, are produced, and then what happens when they are
> used.
>
Frankly narrowing the talk to LLMs is IMHO already talking about
yesterday's news. Like, there is an LLM at the core of Claude, sure. But
actually it is a whole orchestra of different LLMs (and SLMs) trained on
very different data in very different ways and then there are agentic
layers and constitutional layers that are not LLMs at all. And
multimodality adds Large Multimodal Models that are also not *actually*
LLMs anymore.
I like the suggestion of focusing on the output, regardless of the
technology - code generation, patch generation, automated refactoring, test
generation, documentation generation, code reviews with suggestions.
--
Best regards,
Aigars Mahinovs
