I wonder how would they enforce it. If they let a pure LLM Commit into their codebase, then there are a lot of another commit that depends on it, would they remove it and try to submit another commit to replace it, or just let it be ?
Gentoo AI Policy
131–140 of 206 posts
Re: Gentoo AI Policy
#132Every time I encounter these kinds of policy, I can't help but wonder how these policies would be enforced: The people who are considerate enough to abide by these policies, are the ones who would have "cared" about the code qualities and stuff like that, so the policy is a moot point for these kinds of people. OTOH, the people who recklessly spam "contributions" generated from LLMs, by their very nature, would not r…
> I can't help but wonder how these policies would be enforced One of the parties that decided on Gentoo's policy effectively said the same thing. If I get what you're really asking... the reality is, there's no way for them to know if a LLM tool was used internally, it's honor system. But I mean enforcement is just ban the contributor if they become a problem. They've banned or otherwise restricted other ones for be…
I see. So if I'm understanding correctly, then this policy serves as a kind of "legal ground" from which the maintainers can take action against perpetrators, right?
To add a bit more context, when I was writing the original comment, I was mainly thinking of first-time contributors that don't have any track records, and how the policy would work against them.
Re: Gentoo AI Policy
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't make a decision on the tradeoff, the LLVM community did. I also disclosed it in the PR. I also try to mitigate the code review burden by doing as much review as possible on my end & flagging what I don't understand. If your project has a policy against AI usage I won't submit AI-generated code because I respect your decision.
Where did you disclose it?
Only after getting reviews so it is hidden by default: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/146970#issuecommen...
Re: Gentoo AI Policy
#134Every time I encounter these kinds of policy, I can't help but wonder how these policies would be enforced: The people who are considerate enough to abide by these policies, are the ones who would have "cared" about the code qualities and stuff like that, so the policy is a moot point for these kinds of people. OTOH, the people who recklessly spam "contributions" generated from LLMs, by their very nature, would not r…
https://xkcd.com/810/
To me the point is that I want to see effort from a person asking me to review their PR. If it's obvious LLM generated bullshit, I outright ignore it. If they put in the time and effort to mold the LLM output so that it's high quality and they actually understand what they're putting in the PR (meaning they probably replace 99% of the output), then good, that's the point
Re: Gentoo AI Policy
#135I don't understand this anti-AI stance. Either the code works and is useful, and it should be accepted, or it doesn't work and it should be rejected. Does it really matter who wrote it?
LLMs give idiots the power to effectively DDoS repos with useless slop PRs that they have to expend the time and effort to triage and ignore. Like the curl maintainers have said, the review burden of looking at mountains of AI-generated crap is horrifically time consuming.
Re: Gentoo AI Policy
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a former LLVM developer and reviewer, I want to say: 1. Good for you. 2. Ignore the haters in the comments. > my latest PR is my second-ever to LLVM and is an entire linter check. That is so awesome. > The code is of terrible quality and I am at 100+ comments on my latest PR. The LLVM reviewers are big kids. They know how to ignore a PR if they don't want to review it. Don't feel bad about wasting people's time. T…
> They know how to ignore a PR if they don't want to review it How well does that scale as the number of such contributions increases and the triage process itself becomes a sizable effort? LLMs can inadvertently create a sort of DDoS even with the best intentions, and mitigating it costs something .
Wait and see, then change the policy based on what actually happens.
I sort of doubt that all of a sudden there's going to be tons of people wanting to make complex AI contributions to LLVM, but if there are just ban them at that point.
Re: Gentoo AI Policy
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get why water use is the sort of nonsense that spreads around mainstream social media, but it baffles me how a whole council of nerds would pass a vote on a policy that includes that line.
Because it is ideologically motivated.
Being ideologically motivated is not necessarily bad (understanding ideology as a worldview associated with a set of values and priorities). FOSS as a whole is deeply ideologically motivated from its origins. The issue is that there seems to have been a change in the nature of the ideology, leading to some amount of conflict between the older and newer guard.
Re: Gentoo AI Policy
#138I don't understand this anti-AI stance. Either the code works and is useful, and it should be accepted, or it doesn't work and it should be rejected. Does it really matter who wrote it?
The linked API policy lists specific concerns in 3 categories: copyright, quality, ethical. Which one do you not understand?
Re: Gentoo AI Policy
#139> 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 and water. The advertising and use of AI models has caused a significant harm to employees and reduction of service quality. LLMs have been empowering…
> AI doesn't use any more water or energy than any other tool. An hour of Netflix uses same energy as more than 100 GPT questions. A single 10 hour flight (per person*) emits as much as around 100k GPT prompts. It is strange that one would repeat the same nonsense about AI without primary motive being ideological. We should stop doing those things too. I'm still surprised that so many people are flying.
I agree but the magnitudes are important. I don’t want to give up a few prompts per day because of climate. That is stupid.
Re: Gentoo AI Policy
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it is ideologically motivated.
Being ideologically motivated is not necessarily bad (understanding ideology as a worldview associated with a set of values and priorities). FOSS as a whole is deeply ideologically motivated from its origins. The issue is that there seems to have been a change in the nature of the ideology, leading to some amount of conflict between the older and newer guard.
What change do you mean between older and newer guard?