138
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] refalo@programming.dev 8 points 20 hours ago

Can someone please tell the owner of https://codeberg.org/ethical-foss/open-slopware that NetBSD does not in fact have a "Permissive AI Policy."

[-] nykula@piefed.social 5 points 12 hours ago

In fact, it matches two of the "Permissive" criteria: generated code has been merged, and the policy defines conditions that allow such merges (approval by core). The list still recommends various software made by NetBSD developers as viable alternatives to slop projects, where appropriate.

[-] refalo@programming.dev 1 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

But how is requiring explicit approval (meaning it's not something that is typically allowed) considered "permissive"?

[-] Colloidal@programming.dev 2 points 7 hours ago

The wording is weird. But the project (openslop) defines permissive as basically having a path for AI to enter the code. This lumps together both measured approaches like NetBSD's and fully embracing slop contributions in the same category.

I think this only makes sense if you view AI contributions as a taint, something that threatens the licensing of a project. In that optic, it really is an all or nothing. But it doesn't help users choose among the options as much.

this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2026
138 points (96.6% liked)

Opensource

6854 readers
279 users here now

A community for discussion about open source software! Ask questions, share knowledge, share news, or post interesting stuff related to it!

CreditsIcon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

⠀


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS