79
KDE and AI, and you, and me (pointieststick.com)
submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net to c/linux@programming.dev

Personal opinion: Nathan seems to be really side-stepping a lot of concerns brought of up in the comments there. And referring to people coming together collectively in an open-letter when virtually all other channels are closed as 'brigading' is... Not cool. Edit: he retracted the use of brigading.

EDIT 2: Nate has since closed the comments on his blog, and the one discussion thread on KDE Discuss about the AI Policy was closed suddenly without explanation after a KDE developer began to discuss the ethics of AI use. Nate then responded after the thread was closed with this:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] SigHunter@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

literally the next sentence after the reasons, he calls LLMs "bad stuff". That does not sound like "equal weight on the scale" to me.

So yeah, bad stuff. I completely understand why a lot of people have problems with LLMs. I have these concerns as well.

I agree that the license issue should be enough to not touch anything generated by AI, to not taint the codebase

[-] Feyd@programming.dev 5 points 4 days ago

Did you stop reading there? Here is your quote + the next paragraph

So yeah, bad stuff. I completely understand why a lot of people have problems with LLMs. I have these concerns as well.

I also understand why a lot of experts in their field really like LLMs. These are very powerful and sophisticated tools. Capable people with decades of experience can successfully automate away a lot of tedious work, and still end up with a final product identical to what they would have done by hand.

I don't think that conclusion is even accurate and it's certainly the subject of much debate. He then crunches all of both negative and positive into a 5 bullet list that makes it look much more balanced:

  • Very powerful
  • Genuinely useful for various things
  • Dangerous, de-skilling, and/or addictive in the wrong hands
  • Full of really bad externalities
  • Broadly available worldwide at effectively zero cost

You're apparently reading it differently but it looks to me like half the article is trying to funnel into justifying making this a difficult decision after making the case for it really not to be up front. Why do that?

[-] SigHunter@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 3 days ago

I see, yes you are probably right

this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2026
79 points (90.7% liked)

Linux

15060 readers
437 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS