My interaction with AI is mainly to review responses it generates when I do a Google search, so I don’t have anything constructive to comment on. Except to say, it made for interesting reading, especially since it is thoughtfully presented. Thank you for sharing.
Cheers. > On 1 Sep 2026, at 9:30 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > From: Geoff <[email protected]> > To: John Ralls <[email protected]>, "David T." <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [GNC] AI policy on wiki > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > > John / David > > This is an excellent document, concise and clear. I agree with the > Proposed Policy. > > My only suggestion is to use the term "AI" or "AI Tool" instead of > "Large Language Model / LLM" because: > * It matches the title of the policy. > * It encompasses other types of AI tools. > * It is more future proof. > > Well done! > > Geoff > ===== > >> On 1/09/2026 5:07 am, John Ralls wrote: >> I?ve started to sketch out a policy in >> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/AI_Policy#Proposed_Policy. Comments welcome, >> either here or on the page?s Discussions tab (aka Talk page). >> >> Regards, >> John Ralls >> >> >>>>> On Aug 14, 2026, at 09:53, John Ralls <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> David, >>> >>> Thank you for your insights. You?re right, there is no policy there. It?s a >>> work-in-progress, currently summarizing objections to use of AI in open >>> source projects and how some other projects have addressed those >>> objections. To make that clearer I?ve just added the top-level heading >>> "This page is a working draft. There is currently no official policy.? >>> >>> Regards, >>> John Ralls >>> >>> >>>>> On Aug 14, 2026, at 00:31, David T. via gnucash-user >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Long message here. Sorry in advance! >>>> >>>> ;TLDR; The AI policy page needs edits which I feel unqualified to make, >>>> but I think a discussion by the group as a whole is warranted. Delete if >>>> you're not interested. >>>> >>>> In another thread, the GnuCash AI policy (wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/AI_Policy) >>>> was cited as a concern for script consideration. I was unaware of this >>>> page and consulted it. >>>> >>>> I appreciate the effort that John Ralls has put into this page, and the >>>> amount of welcome detail included therein. >>>> >>>> However, I see a number of areas that concern me about the page, and I >>>> think that the larger group should examine the page and weigh in. >>>> >>>> First off: there is, actually, no policy stated on the page. The Opening >>>> Section raises a number of legitimate concerns regarding AI use and >>>> ethics, which strongly suggest that the GnuCash team does not want AI code >>>> included. But then the Other Projects section presents information from >>>> numerous other MAJOR open source projects that cover a very wide range of >>>> AI acceptance. This section in essence undermines whatever position may >>>> have been the team's intention. >>>> >>>> In other words, the two sections make it difficult for a reader to >>>> articulate what GnuCash's policy is or might be. That needs to be fixed, >>>> most likely with a GnuCash Policy section that unambiguously states what >>>> the team will or will not accept. See below. >>>> >>>> Another concern I have is that the opening section includes a range of >>>> concerns that are fundamentally different in their focus. I think some >>>> consideration should be made as to how these are presented or argued. >>>> Perhaps, for example, quality and skills could be grouped and addressed >>>> together, with a focus on results for GnuCash code, while the legal issues >>>> could focus on GnuCash liability. >>>> >>>> I won't quibble about the section about quality, except to note that bad >>>> quality code can come from any source--including and especially from human >>>> contributors. One reason I don't contribute code anywhere is because I >>>> SUCK at coding, and my code is terrible. I'll also note that the tools >>>> have advanced at a staggering pace, to the point where Linus himself is >>>> embracing their use in the Linux kernel. >>>> (<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/CAHk-=wi4zc+ze8e+p3tmv8ttg_80kzsz1syl9anbtmeh5z4...@mail.gmail.com/>) >>>> >>>> I have no qualms about the provenance piece. That's clearly an area that >>>> John has a lot of expertise! >>>> >>>> I personally don't have the legal expertise to judge the conclusions of >>>> the copyrightability of AI code, and while I respect John's greater >>>> knowledge and experience in this area, I question whether anyone can tell >>>> where these legal boundaries lie, and where they will end up. >>>> >>>> While the assertion that AI generated code cannot be copyrighted is >>>> accurate at this time, I suspect the boundaries on this will move >>>> substantially when the legal world gets involved. For instance, I >>>> guarantee that someone will file a case claiming that their code deserves >>>> protection based on some percentage of their own oversight and >>>> contribution, and the courts will issue some kind of decision that will >>>> piss someone else off, who will then appeal, etc. And eventually, the >>>> superannuated fuddy-duddies in Washington will call for hearings (some one >>>> of them will angrily insist that they need to see this Claude guy in the >>>> witness box Im-me-di-ate-ly!) and eventually create a badly crafted law to >>>> establish how copyright should apply in these situations. But I'm >>>> definitely not in a position to know where this ends up. >>>> >>>> Moving on, the question of skill development is fair, but one that is much >>>> larger than the GnuCash project, and I question whether it's relevant for >>>> GnuCash's AI policy page. To put this in perspective, college students >>>> around the world are questioning whether they should stick with Comp Sci >>>> as a major, given the market trends. And while it's in GnuCash's interest >>>> to have skilled coders contributing to the project, see my note above >>>> about quality code. AI isn't necessarily the problem; lazy people who >>>> think they can get complex code handed to them without doing their own >>>> work are. >>>> >>>> I personally agree with the issues regarding LLMs as netizens. >>>> >>>> Because I am Unqualified But Opinionated (UBO), I'll offer here a >>>> suggested addition to the wiki page. It could go at the top or the bottom, >>>> as appropriate: >>>> >>>> --------- >>>> GnuCash AI Policy >>>> Given the concerns and issues raised here, as well as the overall >>>> uncertainty about how AI-generated code fits in computing universe, the >>>> development team for GnuCash has determined that code contributed to the >>>> project should contain only code that the human contributor affirms is as >>>> accurate, error-free, and efficient as they can determine. >>>> >>>> Ideally, this code will not include AI-generated code, but if it does, the >>>> submission MUST: >>>> 1) State clearly the use of AI-generated code. >>>> 2) Name the AI tools and specific prompts used. >>>> 3) Identify the extent of AI-generated code. >>>> 4) State workflows used to evaluate and process AI-generated code. >>>> >>>> Finally, the use of AI-generated code will likely result in additional >>>> scrutiny of such code to verify its quality, accuracy, and legitimacy and >>>> may result in outright rejection of such submissions. >>>> ---------- >>>> David T. >>>> >>>> __________________ _______________________________________________ gnucash-user mailing list [email protected] To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user ----- Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
