On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 at 17:15, Ian Jackson <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Aigars Mahinovs writes ("Re: Draft permissive ballot option (was: GR: Ban
> LLM contributions from Debian)"):
> > Rejecting a class of contributions, without any reference to the *actual*
> > quality or merit of the contribution sounds like a classic case of
> prejudice.
>
> Since I have been insulted:
>
It's not an insult. It is a descriptive word that characterizes your
behaviour. You chose to view that as insulting, because, on some level, you
know that being prejudiced is not really a good quality in a human.
> My opinions about LLMs have been formed by reading some of the very
> alarming results coming out of independent research, reliable news
> reports of so many horrible behaviours by LLM boosters, hand of course
> my direct experience of criminal computer misuse by LLM shysters
> causing serious operational difficulties for systems I run and rely
> on.
>
Characterising other developers as boosters and shysters and accusing
people of criminal misues and other horrible behaviour *as a whole* group
is quite a strong reinforcement of my description. Hackers and spammers
have misued tools as trivial as curl. I am sure you don't want to sound
like people wanting to ban useful tools just because of potentions for
abuse.
> I don't need to smoke to know that smoking is harmful. Rejecting a
> cigarette without assessing its "actual quality" is not an act of
> prejudice.
Actually, you *do* need to know that smoking is harmful. You need
scientific basis for that. You need to have an argument that *all* smoking
is harmful, both to the user and for bystanders. None of that is really an
absolute truth where it comes to LLMs.
> And as for the ethics, I don't need to inspect goods made
> in concentration camps to know that I shouldn't be buying them.
>
No, you are rejecting all shoes on principle because *some* of them are
made in concentration camps.There are plenty of LLMs that can be used
without hurting anyone and a few that are also trained without any real
damage to people or environment.
> Note, the slopbots are not people. They don't have rights. In
> particular they don't have the right not to be rejected because of
> their nature. Nor do they have the right not to be insulted.
We are not talking about "slopbots". We are talking about fellow Debian
Developers (and other contributors) using advanced modern tooling to solve
problems faster, easier and with more joy in their life than before. And
other Debian Developer villifying those people for daring to use tools that
are too advanced and literally rejecting theit humanity in the process.
Please reconsider your tone.
--
Best regards,
Aigars Mahinovs
