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 1306A24E016 for ; Wed, 15 Oct 2025 19:11:50 +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=1760555512; cv=none; b=hCvsOe55nitG7tyiY6/wXzl7axRmXdP7cgNQWSZlBIzj8GsQ8sTvctud6kLg0pZ+Ox0YqVBClSugLuaYSsvtXdDeMa27+WJlNSV5jAGeDdkPwyUfL9ZCAEWVsSRKQPJ+McZn3sP6cDiRFgtyYAEgzcuj5KZRMAjMWGmsMz6BsMs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760555512; c=relaxed/simple; bh=rDk/ZzUY29Ygf+9Xuuob9NmvCeLaQGUQnNSUEpswi3g=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=drP+qXXqwUJXihUV7i33xzrYoQVOpKELcavaxJZ6PKvBf0nBPPUOjjFHn4izM2Lo1GX76ltoC1BRdX88/gDrBEcV1GbnyKPEGbJr2WR9yno8cg+Eo+i+XHRaqcpwrqSVaCSnhsSTn4TV4E9l569g4J7ItbckUQt4mrgxZYz+Wak= 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 B98FB34106C; Wed, 15 Oct 2025 19:11:49 +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: Organization: Gentoo References: <4599445186b3e659166f5c73f682467703396e9e.1760543375.git.alx@kernel.org> <1924e1ed-bb96-4a08-a47e-8e77857fa431@redhat.com> <7n2g7ccnlfcjm2pgptwwuq3pn6dpnrwvqfxa4exa2hnjikajwk@men5xbekuoop> <878qhc6lv5.fsf@gentoo.org> User-Agent: mu4e 1.12.13; emacs 31.0.50 Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2025 20:11:47 +0100 Message-ID: <87tt0056a4.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: > On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 09:03:28PM +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote: >> Hi Sam, >> >> On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 07:49:50PM +0100, Sam James wrote: >> > >> 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. > > BTW, I assume TTS means text-to-speech. Please don't use abbreviations > not supported by wtf(1), or parenthesize their meaning in the first use. I normally try to honour that. Anyway, I'm not interested in discussing further at this time. I don't think the way you've suggested this subproposal is constructive. > >> >> The following is enough, IMO, as justification: >> >> Ethical concerns. >> The business side of AI boom is creating serious ethical >> concerns. Among them: >> >> - Commercial AI projects are frequently indulging in >> blatant copyright violations to train their models. >> - Their operations are causing concerns about the huge >> use of energy, water, and other natural resources. >> - The advertising and use of AI models has caused >> a significant harm to employees and reduction of >> service quality. >> - LLMs have been empowering all kinds of spam and scam >> efforts. >> >> Quality concerns. >> Popular LLMs are really great at generating plausibly >> looking, but meaningless content. They pose both the >> risk of lowering the quality of a project, and of >> requiring an unfair human effort from contributors and >> maintainers to review contributions and detect the >> mistakes resulting from the use of AI. >> >> AI tools should be considered adversarial, as if they >> were a black box with Jia Tan inside them. >> >> >> Cheers, >> Alex >> >> -- >> >> Use port 80 (that is, <...:80/>).