2026-09-11 22:26 UTC
Replies (4)
-
@neclimdul@lemmy.world 2026-09-12 04:40
a lot of communities are aggressively clamping down on AI contributions. i think leaving the floodgates open really hasnt worked out. People touting “the kernel does it so get over it” gloss over the contributions being small and strict “your ai code reflects you and you own the consequences” policy. additionally i dont buy the enterprise does it so get on board argument. the floss movement is literally built around pushing back on corporate norms. i dont know why anyone would take thay argument at face value. for a lot of FLOSS communities, the ethics of the software is as important as the quality. which is why so many Debian community members felt betrayed by milquetoast ai policy adoption. Graphene made a similar “look they’re all doing it too” argument on Mastadon which I feel just really undermines their image as the alternative. “we dont police our developers usage as long as the quality meets out high standards. all code is at the end of the day ownedand reviewed by the humans in our teams” or some other equally silly statement would still have had critics but at least they wouldn’t sound like a grade schooler wining about how infair life is.
-
@Toga77@lemmy.world 2026-09-12 05:51
Is it just a tool really? Using a hammer doesn’t atrophy the muscle in your arms as you use it. However using AI has already been shown to atrophy the brain. www.media.mit.edu/…/your-brain-on-chatgpt/
-
@HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org 2026-09-12 08:44
OSS projects have already started to recognize that LLM is just a tool and how you use that tool matters a lot more than whether you are using said tool at all. This tool is however not neutral but has a lot of steering built in. Like an advisor who optimizes heavily for personal gain. Lets bring StackOverflow for analogy: we didn’t ban browsers for code development because one can navigate to StackOverflow and copy-paste some really crappy code. Thid is a good exanple. I am programming over 40 years and i used it to find interesting new angles on issues with seemingly obvious answers. Like “what is the most portable, clearest eay to efficiently serislize data in a c struct”. LLMs are SO on steroids (actually trained on SO topics). So grabbing LLM to get a sense of direction or shape is an OK use in general, but copy-pasting it’s results blindly is silly and dangerous. There’s a second argument that AI is ruining OSS communities which I believe is true, but refusing to accept AI code is a self-defeating action. Why? Because AI training needs unadulterated source of knowledge, one not tainted with AI and OSS communities rejecting AI would be that source. Also: if OSS community did not use AI it would hardly stop it from continuing it’s growth in Enterprise. So there’s not much of a winning strategy there either. Which brings us to GrapheneO
-
@spicehoarder@lemmy.zip 2026-09-12 13:54
Yeah, just one small problem, muchacho. Whenever a language recieves a breaking change you gotta retrain the model again, and a lot of your references are useless now. There is no “improving” it’s just a vicious cycle. Your argument is that of peer pressure and not compelling. “Join us or we’ll just steal your code anyway” Here’s my rebuttal. Garbage in, garbage out. Most projects out there are trash. This tool doesn’t help you build good code, it helps you throw together a pile of trash. An actually helpful LLM would be one trained on the damn language itself and coding best practices. Almost everyone has lost the plot here. You DON’T want a massive LLM, the small specialized ones are good enough. So you can use it as auto complete, like the tech was intended.