Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Debian polls its developers on AI: permit or ban?

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 64 posts

Re: Debian polls its developers on AI: permit or ban?

#21

Post by dan_gggggg »

ragebol wrote: post #18

> If Proposal H has a weakness, it's that it does not distinguish between local and cloud-based LLMs Is the energy usage so different between local and cloud inference? Both require electricity, the local option even more than the better optimized cloud variant even perhaps. How either is powered makes the crucial difference I suppose. Both can potentially run on solar as well as gas or nuclear. It's the training tha…

People want to ban LLM contributors not because of energy usage, but because AI generated code is unmaintainable and the people who generate it tend to engage with others in domineering and brazenly manipulative ways.

Re: Debian polls its developers on AI: permit or ban?

#23

Post by someaccount1234 »

lproven wrote: post #2

Posting this because I want people to vote -- and ideally vote for a total ban.

Given almost all people here cannot vote, does this mean you posted non-AI-generated slop?

Wouldn't it be better to reduce slop, no matter how it was produced, instead of only AI-generated contributions, including non-slop contributions?

Re: Debian polls its developers on AI: permit or ban?

#25

Post by lproven »

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #16

Crazy how divided AI is here on HN… We’re almost to the point where the average non-technical person uses AI daily (just like phones and the internet were once only used by the technocrats) without blinking, it will be ubiquitous and universal in adoption, yet comments here on HN from people that have the vantage point of seeing AND understanding how AI works, and who can also predict the inevitable integration of AI…

> it will be ubiquitous and universal in adoption

[[citation needed]]

Which is gonna be tricky as I am confident you don't have a time machine.

I think generative AI as a whole is a total scam. It has uses, but not many, and outside of translation, not good ones... and yet, it is running at truly epic financial losses. Multiple trillions of dollars are being pumped into this.

I think the next AI Winter, the 3rd big one, is coming very soon.

There's going to be a market crash to dwarf the dot-com crash and 20087 financial crisis (both of which I worked through as an employed adult), and a lot of the current tech industry will be wiped out.

I've watched that happen before as well.

I am quite looking forward to it. I have no stocks or shares in anything anywhere, few savings, no loans, no debt... but all my immediate family own their own homes outright, and I am close to retirement age.

Let it all burn.

Re: Debian polls its developers on AI: permit or ban?

#26

Post by someaccount1234 »

tescreal wrote: post #8
lproven wrote: post #2

Posting this because I want people to vote -- and ideally vote for a total ban.

I'm curious about enforcement. Are they going to ban packages with a whiff of llm? If so, how will they reliably audit?

No, otherwise one would have to remove the Linux kernel, the Hurd kernel, LLVM, Python, Chromium, Firefox, Rust and everything using these. And probably some more.

Re: Debian polls its developers on AI: permit or ban?

#27

Post by dangggggg »

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #16

Crazy how divided AI is here on HN… We’re almost to the point where the average non-technical person uses AI daily (just like phones and the internet were once only used by the technocrats) without blinking, it will be ubiquitous and universal in adoption, yet comments here on HN from people that have the vantage point of seeing AND understanding how AI works, and who can also predict the inevitable integration of AI…

[dead]

Re: Debian polls its developers on AI: permit or ban?

#28

Post by lproven »

dan_gggggg wrote: post #21
ragebol wrote: post #18

> If Proposal H has a weakness, it's that it does not distinguish between local and cloud-based LLMs Is the energy usage so different between local and cloud inference? Both require electricity, the local option even more than the better optimized cloud variant even perhaps. How either is powered makes the crucial difference I suppose. Both can potentially run on solar as well as gas or nuclear. It's the training tha…

People want to ban LLM contributors not because of energy usage, but because AI generated code is unmaintainable and the people who generate it tend to engage with others in domineering and brazenly manipulative ways.

"¿Porque no los dos?"

"Why not both?"

Re: Debian polls its developers on AI: permit or ban?

#30

Post by someaccount1234 »

VCFundedGenYer wrote: post #24

Total ban please. This nonsense needs to end. Linus Torvalds is weakly vibe coding the kernel, that's bad enough.

Then you cannot use Linux, Firefox, Chromium, Python, Rust, LLVM and so on. Hurd can't be used either.

Maybe you have to switch to FreeDOS?

Post reply on HN