From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (woodpecker.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82C4229BDAD for ; Wed, 15 Oct 2025 18:49:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=140.211.166.183 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760554196; cv=none; b=oAn+T7w/uooaAXOv3RPGUHagB2mtJLc+wjukz8jUBMV/scJ+m8FpMTfRsgYcN6OkaZwgcrdba8k1yIY5TLaUK5FE9vAjYlANiweiUQnGhw68VPfQbKntr5tt8XZm+uJOypoIPgWp1b5lqlol+v/jYxBm5VBUODbBmVUQohQ3l0M= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760554196; c=relaxed/simple; bh=UTr0EF8Ga+PyqrV1uCOWnpe91Eb3HITuWAU/a0ivQfM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=L/QBej+NCwgQnLymkxfsOgWcbeXVYP7JcJBC76A6aNB7Js2th3RjgVit+8VsNYN21jqO8WBRmis7mc5JdkjsDCEn47Xn7gdJmh2l8jQOpvy4uDO6qJpjXmlMmdS3CiWrlr2No7Pprdes7kzwKTBIgIoy5uLQ7065dww9ESfVCvg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gentoo.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gentoo.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=140.211.166.183 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gentoo.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gentoo.org Received: from mop.sam.mop (2.8.3.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.a.5.c.d.c.d.9.1.0.b.8.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa [IPv6:2001:8b0:19dc:dc5a::382]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange secp256r1 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: sam) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 130B233FE60; Wed, 15 Oct 2025 18:49:52 +0000 (UTC) From: Sam James To: Alejandro Colomar Cc: Carlos O'Donell , linux-man@vger.kernel.org, Collin Funk Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] CONTRIBUTING.d/ai: Add guidelines banning AI for contributing In-Reply-To: <7n2g7ccnlfcjm2pgptwwuq3pn6dpnrwvqfxa4exa2hnjikajwk@men5xbekuoop> Organization: Gentoo References: <4599445186b3e659166f5c73f682467703396e9e.1760543375.git.alx@kernel.org> <1924e1ed-bb96-4a08-a47e-8e77857fa431@redhat.com> <7n2g7ccnlfcjm2pgptwwuq3pn6dpnrwvqfxa4exa2hnjikajwk@men5xbekuoop> User-Agent: mu4e 1.12.13; emacs 31.0.50 Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2025 19:49:50 +0100 Message-ID: <878qhc6lv5.fsf@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-man@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Alejandro Colomar writes: > Hi Carlos, > > On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 12:03:07PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote: >> > In v4, I've added a paragraph clarifying that AI assistive tools are >> > also included in the bad. >> >> Isn't this the *opposite* of Gentoo's policy and QEMU's policy? > > It is the opposite of what Gentoo claims their policy says. But it's > what my read of their policy says (and I'm not alone there, as the same > interpretation was mentioned in libc-alpha@). They should clarify their > policy if they don't mean what it says. I already said we plan on it. I thought that was pretty clear. > >> We should base the contribution policy on things we can objectively >> measure and claim. >> >> Rejecting AI content in contributions is objective and measurable >> since you can't attest the DCO clearly with this content. > > Rejecting AI content would follow the first concern, but the second and > third concerns would be entirely ignored by a policy that permits AI > static analyzers. > It is hard in my mind to justify rejecting TTS or similar that may be based on AI. >> > diff --git a/CONTRIBUTING.d/ai b/CONTRIBUTING.d/ai >> > new file mode 100644 >> > index 000000000..faab2df1b >> > --- /dev/null >> > +++ b/CONTRIBUTING.d/ai >> > @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ >> > +Name >> > + AI - artificial intelligence policy >> > + >> > +Description >> > + It is expressly forbidden to contribute to this project any >> > + content that has been created with the assistance of AI tools. >> >> This is OK, the forbiddance is on the created content. > > "created *with the assistance* of AI tools" > > If I write some code, and iterate over it by passing it through static > analyzers and editing as appropriate, I'd say the code has been created > with the assistance of those tools. > > Let's consider this example from The Lord of the Rings. Did Celebrimbor > create the three Elven rings with assistance of Sauron? Sauron did not > produce the rings, but it influenced the author enough to introduce > vulnerabilities in the rings. > >> > + >> > + This also includes AI assistive tools used in the contributing >> > + process, even if such tools do not generate the contributed >> > + code. >> >> I object strongly to this paragraph. >> >> It is the *opposite* of what Gentoo's policy intended. >> >> This is policy over-reach into the lives of contributors. > > > Cheers, > Alex