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

Redox OS has adopted a Certificate of Origin policy and a strict no-LLM policy

gitlab.redox-os.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 504 posts

Re: Redox OS has adopted a Certificate of Origin policy and a strict no-LLM policy

#191

Post by duskdozer »

orf wrote: post #181
jacquesm wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you can't. See, that's where you are just wrong: when you don't respect the boundaries an open source project sets that you want to contribute to then you are a net negative. Restricting this is their right, and it is not for you to attempt to overrule that right. Besides the fact that you do not oversee the consequences it also makes you an asshole. They're not asking for you to write standing on your head, they…

They are asking me to author my contributions in a way that they approve of. The essence of the request is the same as asking someone to author them whilst standing on their head. Except they don’t, won’t and can’t control that: the very request is insulting. I’ll make a change any way I choose, upright, sideways, using AI. My choice. Not theirs. Their choice is to accept it or reject it based purely on the change it…

So, "might makes right", essentially?

Re: Redox OS has adopted a Certificate of Origin policy and a strict no-LLM policy

#192

Post by bandrami »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #170
jacquesm wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My rules of thumb is much shorter: don't. The open source world has already been ripped off by AI the last thing they need is for AI to pollute the pedigree of the codebase.

Suppose almost all work in the future is done via LLMs, just like almost all transportation is done today via cars instead of horses. Do you think your worldview is still a reasonable one under those conditions?

That would only be a world where the copyright and other IP uncertainties around the output (and training!) of LLMs were a solved and known question. So that's not the world we currently live in.

Re: Redox OS has adopted a Certificate of Origin policy and a strict no-LLM policy

#193

Post by cpburns2009 »

algoth1 wrote: post #72

What would constitute "clearly llm generated" though

The clearly LLM PRs I receive are formatted similarly to:

    ## Summary
    ...

    ## Problem
    ...

    ## Solution
    ...

    ## Verification
    ...
They're too methodical, and duplicate code when they're longer than a single line fix. I've never received a pull request formatted like that from a human.

Re: Redox OS has adopted a Certificate of Origin policy and a strict no-LLM policy

#194

Post by bandrami »

NitpickLawyer wrote: post #44
ptnpzwqd wrote: post #6

I think this is a reasonable decision (although maybe increasingly insufficient). It doesn't really matter what your stance on AI is, the problem is the increased review burden on OSS maintainers. In the past, the code itself was a sort of proof of effort - you would need to invest some time and effort on your PRs, otherwise they would be easily dismissed at a glance. That is no longer the case, as LLMs can quickly g…

Project maintainers will always have the right to decide how to maintain their projects, and "owe" nothing to no one. That being said, to outright ban a technology in 2026 on pure "vibes" is not something I'd say is reasonable. Others have already commented that it's likely unenforceable, but I'd also say it's unreasonable for the sake of utility. It leaves stuff on the table in a time where they really shouldn't. Th…

Until the copyright questions surrounding LLM output is solved it's not "vibes" to reject them but simply "legal caution".

Re: Redox OS has adopted a Certificate of Origin policy and a strict no-LLM policy

#195

Post by r_lee »

advancespace wrote: post #156
ptnpzwqd wrote: post #6

I think this is a reasonable decision (although maybe increasingly insufficient). It doesn't really matter what your stance on AI is, the problem is the increased review burden on OSS maintainers. In the past, the code itself was a sort of proof of effort - you would need to invest some time and effort on your PRs, otherwise they would be easily dismissed at a glance. That is no longer the case, as LLMs can quickly g…

[flagged]

did you write this with an LLM?

Re: Redox OS has adopted a Certificate of Origin policy and a strict no-LLM policy

#196

Post by bandrami »

lukaslalinsky wrote: post #20

I think we will be getting into an interesting situation soon, where project maintainers use LLMs because they truly are useful in many cases, but will ban contributors for doing so, because they can't review how well did the user guide the LLM.

And in general a lot more people want to use LLMs to generate things than want to consume the things LLMs generate. Some of the more bullish people should think harder about this pretty clear trend.

Re: Redox OS has adopted a Certificate of Origin policy and a strict no-LLM policy

#197

Post by flammafex »

eatonphil wrote: post #176

If you're curious to see what everyone else is doing, I did a survey of over 100 major source available projects and four of them banned AI assisted commits (NetBSD, GIMP, Zig, and qemu). On the other hand projects with AI assisted commits you can easily find include Linux, curl, io_uring, MariaDB, DuckDB, Elasticsearch, and so on. Of the 112 projects surveyed, 70 of them had AI assisted commits already. https://thec…

[flagged]

Re: Redox OS has adopted a Certificate of Origin policy and a strict no-LLM policy

#198

Post by duskdozer »

menaerus wrote: post #80

Let someone from the Redox team go read [1], [2], and [3]. If they still insist on keeping their position then ... well. The industry is being redefined as we speak and everyone doing the push-back are pushing against themselves really. [1] https://www.datadoghq.com/blog/ai/harness-first-agents/ [2] https://www.datadoghq.com/blog/ai/fully-autonomous-optimizat... [3] https://www.datadoghq.com/blog/engineering/self-opt…

Wouldn't expect anything else from big data collectors.

Re: Redox OS has adopted a Certificate of Origin policy and a strict no-LLM policy

#199

Post by lkjdsklf »

UqWBcuFx6NV4r wrote: post #134
ZaoLahma wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've recently worked extensively with "prompt coding", and the model we're using is very good at following such instructions early on. However after deep reasoning around problems, it tends to focus more on solving the problem at hand than following established guidelines. Still haven't found a good way to keep it on course other than "Hey, remember that thing that you're required to do? Still do that please."

A separate pre-planning step, so the context window doesn’t get too full too early on. Off the shelf agentic coding tools should be doing this for you.

They do not.

At my company, I use them all the time with the fancy models and everything. Preplanning does not solve the problem they're describing.

When claude is doing a complex task, it will regularly lose track of the rules (in either the .rules stuff or CLAUDE.md) and break conventions.

It follows it most of the time, but not all of the time.

Post reply on HN