Ian Jackson <[email protected]> writes: > 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.
> 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. How is this possible given #1?
