Seconded, with our without point 8 Enrico
On Fri, Jul 24, 2026 at 04:25:32PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2026 16:25:32 +0100 > From: Ian Jackson <[email protected]> > To: Matthias Geiger <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: GR: Ban LLM contributions from Debian > X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 27.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > > Matthias Geiger writes ("GR: Ban LLM contributions from Debian"): > > What follows is a GR proposal to ban LLM contributions. > > Thanks for this. Obviously, I agree, and I have seconded your option. > But I worry that it might not reach the 3:1 majority required to amend > a foundation document. Also it has given rise to a lot of > interpretative nitpicking. > > I wrote an alternative proposal below which is intended to > - avoid legalistic prescriptions which need to be nitpicked > - recognise that we're in a difficult situation > It is (effectively) a set of requests to existing teams and a > supplement to the Code of Conduct. > > > - -8<- BEGIN PROPOSAL > > Summary: Reject LLMs (generative "AI") as far as practical > > BACKGROUND > > LLMs have many serious problems, including: undermining the mechanisms > of free software community building; environmental damage; > exploitation of authors; disruption to open web hosting by > aggressive scraping; generation and promulgation of bullshit; > polluting the information commons; hazards to users' mental health; > economic bubbles; distortion of the computer hardware market; > fraud; ownership by horrible people and companies; and so on. > Ethical and safe use of this technology is almost impossible. > > Ideally, LLM output should not form any part of software that we rely > on, nor should LLM output ever take the place of human-written prose. > > Unfortunately some of the wider software world, including many of our > upstreams, take a different view. Therefore a complete ban on LLM > output as part of Debian is currently impractical. > > REQUESTS > > 1. We request that all contributors to Debian avoid the use of LLMs in > their Debian work. > > 2. We request that all decisionmakers within Debian discourage LLM use > as much as practical. Practicality is a judgement call and we > recognise that it will involve uncomfortable compromises. > > 3. We request that everyone, even outside Debian, should refrain from > using this technology. In particular, the Free Software and Open > Source communities should reject LLMs. We recognise that not > everyone will heed this call. > > REQUIREMENTS (SUPPLEMENT TO THE CODE OF CONDUCT) > > 4. Within Debian, messages to humans (including for example bug > reports, mailing list messages, discussions on Salsa, and blog > posts on Planet Debian) must be drafted solely by humans without > LLM assistance. > > 5. Any use of LLMs for Debian work must be disclosed. > > 6. Individual projects and maintainers may ban LLM contributions > completely. Such bans (including by upstream projects) must be > respected. > > 7. Violations of these requirements should be treated as violations of > the Code of Conduct and should result in swift but proportionate > disciplinary action. > > 8. Any contributor who feels they cannot write in English without > assistance, may write in their native language, and expect readers > to use translation tools of their choice. In that case a > human-written English summary would be very welcome but is not > required. In any case we promise not to shame anyone for any > linguistic mistakes. > > - ->8- END PROPOSAL > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > iQJUBAEBCgA+FiEEQWOBFNEyiDslog3dR1FXV9gAJFYFAmpjg8wgHGlqYWNrc29u > QGNoaWFyay5ncmVlbmVuZC5vcmcudWsACgkQR1FXV9gAJFZyPg//WFcBt7E3JnAl > XKeFCxR9L1wh2BbGF1O1nkrUAmFjZ9dSIYOob5Rftepy9jryUBPF8X7JL3iaCUMJ > 60qURMcMC9+hN3P2Kl1RpeEYj08EfBKDzPAWfJsZ8eLZEFUHhYz/MYcAK9MHw2Ad > d9H/BdtPFTqYDe4kj2oauYxrpxhUFa84hSABKzszZnK/dF7tzlnjHVBowN8p9CmI > l6lqHrwULXWkSS+XU2Wa9xXoBqLTkTKsq4OWi5HDuKGNwegGri1vDS5+1RD6vC6s > SVso+4BaEeOdrBaTFXFEECTF0zNEfNrq4Ak0XdKz9tP2m/NnG20irXWpaq99bb28 > 2y1yCN0xmCpUIO7DNnOGN8pLwPZnvLjnZTEZqoLOrf7TNhmK1HD6KmFQfA+lAVnR > sWLf6BfPPz94y4nijEN/vklRzR8RXWWt4SpNyGXc82Dqt4zE0mAqs30G9ZvK18Gh > d8oT+SC9MJPUhLsloGXMXaYKnmuIzxp89h6VL+Ab2UmArX8MRrcY2aGjCiDzd3L8 > p2ZSfHpbmTDa7xZKb3c+eM3QBEy0HI2MDwixlOcAKwS6ZKneO/trEibD9CoNG0tL > tiySKOeIBt6fLnks3l6EQHPIwBLRcpTUlaoFFgU6Q/zNDvnTkVvnIrQYhB86Bak+ > wUTKiUjFezFU1PL9dSIPzZbd7d/eC9Y= > =2G1U > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > -- > Ian Jackson <[email protected]> These opinions are my own. > > Pronouns: they/he. If I emailed you from @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, > that is a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter. >
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
