Hi Hugo,

On 2026-05-06 at 09:59+02:00, Hugo Buddelmeijer wrote:
> If someone would make a P.R. to Guix with LLM generated output, would 
> you ask them to disclose that?  Would you ask (or entice) them to stop 
> doing that?  Or would you let it be?  If you do want to restrict others, 
> then it is only fair to be asked to substantiate your objections.

If you replace _LLM generated output_ with, say, _Windows source code_,
I think you can infer my answer.  Sure, copyright is only a mean
to our end that is software freedom, but we cannot expect others to play
by the rules if we don't.

This is not restricting contributors from patching Guix,
but rather declining to help them with redistributing such patches
that neither parties have the rights to.

On 2026-05-06 at 09:59+02:00, Hugo Buddelmeijer wrote:
> I don't even care about the P.R.s, or the copyright, I care about the 
> essence.  I'm trying to figure out what the core objections are, because 
> this is very powerful technology, so we should understand it well.
>
> The writings of the free software movement are excellent and those of 
> the electronic frontier foundation are too.  They are very specific in 
> their complaints and their remedies.  They are very convincing.  Is 
> there really nothing like that for the AI debate?

I think this is a response to the open slopware list, which is
for boycotting generative models by steering clear of any association
with them.  The FSF AFAIK also holds this position for itself,
i.e. deeming such models as violating their users' freedom
and demoting its uses.  As a GNU project, Guix obviously cannot
integrate with existing user-hostile LLM SaaSS or encourage
contributors to use them.

Guix also cannot stop people from using non-free software or software
whose sole purpose is against software freedom, but it should help
people escape such injutice.  You can notice the preference
for GNU packages over less politically-aligned alternatives.

The libre status of LLM outputs and their parent codebase are
being questioned.  If we flag packages as such people will
at least be able to tell if something is strictly free software
or might be nonredistributable one day, so they can collectively
exercise their freedom by maintaining a strictly free fork.

Just adding some contexts, which I suppose are not sufficient
for addressing your particular concern.

Best wishes,
Phong

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to