You cannot tell from the code necessarily anyway so anti-AI policies are hard to enforce. In the end the developer (or AI wielding human) is responsible for the code quality and its license which is what matters. All this discussion feels just like the usual culture war dividing the community. I'm more concerned about the intentions of people adding fuel to the fire.
I you are ready to make an exception for the Linux kernel you might as well make an exception for the Debian distribution which is the basis of a lot of stuff.
I'm not sure why you think Debian is embracing AI
They took a nuteral stance on it
I wouldn't call that neutral. Allowing it with no disclosure sounds like embracing but trying to hide it.
For the people who really don't want AI in their OS, check this.
Cool list apart from all the downstream projects whose upstreams use AI
Ooh, that's one I hadn't seen. Thanks for sharing!
There's this list of distros that actively reject AI/LLM contributions.
There's also this list with a few more not listed in the first.
Also found that AntiX rejects AI usage based on a conversation about it in their forum, but they are based on Debian, so...
Given Debian's slow development and focus on stability above all else I doubt this will make any practical difference to contributions that actually end up in releases. And honestly at this point every OS or piece of software needs to have AI reviewing its codebase for vulnerabilities, even if it's not making any code contributions.
I think if only submissions that follow a certain guideline are accepted then I doubt this will result in lower quality, it will even likely increase its quality by fixing relevant bugs. So I don't think quality will degrade so long as parts of it don't turn into 100% automated code factories.
The only thing that remains are the ethical challanges but hardly anything in this world is completely free of entanglement to ethically questionable practices. You use a lenovo to write code? They are probably funding millions into AI. You have a nvidia gpu in your computer? Yeah, ofcourse it is good to take a principled stand against corpo-fascism. But holier-than-thou approaches will only bite back.
But I don't understand why people did not vote for accepting AI code but with disclosure. Seems like there is nothing to lose there even if you are an AI supporter. And could be useful for statistical purposes like analysing how human vs robot PR differ in things like rejection rate/severity of bugs found etc
I'd say wait and see what they actually do. People are super trigger happy with shitstorms these days. But maybe wait for them to actually do something bad?!
LLMs were created with the mass theft of others work by corporations that are now reselling that same information while making billions off it. Thats enough for me to want to step back from any project utilizing these tools.
making billions off it
Lol, no its all circular investing and will soon fail to prop itself up. Then all that stolen work gets sent to open weights for everyone to use. Still not the best, but you can't close Pandora's box.
The 2008 financial crisis was the largest upwards transfer of wealth in US history. There are people who still haven't financially recovered what they lost to this day, but the US economy had regained more than it lost within 2 years. It's just that 90% of it went to those who lost the least.
With AI being forced into general stocks and federal bailouts practically guaranteed, it's going to be the exact same scenario. The AI companies will be "too big to fail" and we'll all be footing the bill.
Just like with every financial crisis, when the bubble bursts they will get absurd amounts of money to save their unethical shite companies with money from all of us (through taxes). The rich only ever get richer.
Arch, Void, Gentoo, Chimera and Aeryn all have anti-AI policies.
So . . . maybe it's a good thing that Gentoo with GNU Hurd exists? Does Hurd even have an AI policy?
Hurd doesnt even know AI exists.
I believe Fedora requires disclosure on the use of LLMs in contributions, and that fully generated submissions are not allowed, so slightly better than Debian in this respect (https://docs.fedoraproject.org/council/policy/ai-contribution-policy/)
Linux Mint is always a nice option, but I can't find an LLM policy for them, but given that they are removing snaps and other Ubuntu bits that nobody likes by default, I would imagine they are more resistant on LLM contributions. They don't have a policy set in place for this though.
Arch Linux (and derivatives, I currently use EndeavourOS but many like CachyOS too!) are awesome too if you are alright with rolling release. Again, no LLM policy I can find (I didn't look very hard though, I have better things to do), but I imagine they would be more resistant to it.
Mint is still downstream of Debian though, which will make them taking a stance against it pretty tough.
i wouldn't say they're "embracing AI" or 'sloppified'.. but anyway.
i think slackware isn't using llm stuff for development. it's my daily/fav distro. but it's quite different from debian.
Maybe this is the push you need to . . . Yes, maybe it’s time for . . . FreeBSD.
Search your feelings. You know it to be true.
I had another look and I think it's basically down to Gentoo. If you're in for the BSDs, you got NetBSD as well. And OpenBSD seems to be anti AI-contributions as well. I didn't really find anything else with a strict No-AI policy.
Gentoo?
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