----- Forwarded message from apteryx <[email protected]> -----

Date: Tue, 26 May 2026 03:38:01 +0200
From: apteryx <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [guix/guix-consensus-documents] 008-human-crafting.md: Add
 initial draft. (PR #13)
X-Mailer: Forgejo

   Are we supposed to discuss this here, on on the guix-devel mailing
   list? At any rate, given the volume of comments in just a few days
   already, the Avoid repeating arguments that have already been given.
   suggestion doesn't entice me to jump right in and express my opinion
   freely, since I now have to read and comprehend an unstructured wall of
   text (24k words) on Codeberg, which is a big commitment to just get
   started expressing an opinion. It may be better to lift that constraint
   and let everyone express themselves freely, with the GCD author(s) or
   some conductor bearing the responsibility of synthesizing and
   addressing the points made, however repetitive some may be. The volume
   of comments is perhaps also an indication that this issue is polarized
   enough that reaching a consensus on it will be difficult.

   ---
   [1]View it on Codeberg.org.
   Codeberg e.V. – Arminiusstraße 2-4 – 10551 Berlin – Germany
   Registered at registration court Amtsgericht Charlottenburg VR36929.

References

   1. 
https://codeberg.org/guix/guix-consensus-documents/pulls/13#issuecomment-15887837

----- End forwarded message -----

I completely agree. You know, the one really nice thing about GCD008
discussion is that it brings out what incredible intelligent and
civilised individuals we have in our project. Even though the ideas
are clearly opposed to each other we *all* try to find some middle
ground. It is delightful for someone like me who has seen things
escalate in many free software projects.

I repeat we should stop trying to split our community by a single AI
statement (people always get disenfranchised, as Ricardo rightly wrote
up, by any position one takes). To add, personally, I *am* worried
about the future of our ecology and I do think AI can lead to a
dystopian future.  Also I agree that investors can be stupid and
leaders can be evil.  Humanity proves that over and over again. But if
you really believe in humanity you also believe that science, rational
thought and democracy are strong forces that will survive and
persevere. The force for self governance and open discourse is very
strong (once gained).

Every argument raised in GCD008 can be countered because our AI future
is in the making. Nothing is set in stone and this thing is simply to
big for us and it is too early to take a position (even if you can
clearly do so as an individual). I suggest we go with Christine's
wording, leave out everything else on energy, evilness, worries of the
future, etc. etc. All we should really care about is that no slop
enters Guix and that people take ownership of what they do whatever
way they go about it. 

Any position the project takes will disenfranchise a part of our
current and future community. Which is not a good thing, unless we
want to keep Guix small and limited to a certain mind set. If that is
the goal you may state that as well.


  • [nore...@codeberg... Pjotr Prins
    • Re: Submitti... Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
      • Re: Subm... Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
        • Re: ... Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
          • ... Ludovic Courtès
            • ... Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
              • ... Ludovic Courtès
                • ... Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
                • ... Greg Hogan
                • ... Ludovic Courtès
      • Re: Subm... Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli

Reply via email to