The issue expresses doubt about a policy specific to LLMs being accepted. I think the way to go might be to accept that the bar for outside contributions should unfortunately be higher. It doesn't take an LLM to have a glut of low quality contributions, it just takes an incentive and some attention, as we've seen with Hacktoberfest: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31628342
LLM policy?
31–40 of 145 posts
Re: LLM policy?
#32Unfortunately, LLMs empower "contributors" who can't be bothered to put in any effort and who don't care about the negative impact of their actions on the maintainers.
The open-source community, generally speaking, is a high-trust society and I'm afraid that LLM abuse may turn it into a low-trust society. The end result will be worse than the status quo for everyone involved.
Re: LLM policy?
#33I think everything has a growing problem with LLM/AI generated content. Emails, blog posts, news articles, research papers, grant applications, business proposals, music, art, pretty much everything you can think of. There’s already more human produced content in the world than anyone could ever hope to consume, we don’t need more from AI.
In some ways I'm starting to enjoy this. Do you remember the 419 scams? 'Hi, I'm a Nigerian prince named Michael Jordan. Give me $50 so I can buy some chemicals to clean a bunch of money I secretly stowed away and I'll send you $5000.' People actually used to fall for that. Of course some people probably still would (and a lot more certainly gets blocked by spam blockers) but I think overall society grew less substan…
> but I think overall society grew less substantially less gullible over time.
Absolutely not. All that happened is most people became aware that "Nigerians offering you money are scammers." But they still fall for other get rich quick schemes so long as it diverges a little bit from that known pattern, and they'll confidently walk into the scam despite being warned and saying, "It's not a scam, dumbass. It's not like that Nigerian price stuff." If anything, people seem to be becoming more confident that they're in on some secret knowledge and everyone else is being scammed.
Re: LLM policy?
#34I think everything has a growing problem with LLM/AI generated content. Emails, blog posts, news articles, research papers, grant applications, business proposals, music, art, pretty much everything you can think of. There’s already more human produced content in the world than anyone could ever hope to consume, we don’t need more from AI.
[flagged]
Re: LLM policy?
#35Some years ago I read the Neal Stephenson book Anathem . SPOILERS: it has a version of the Internet called the Reticulum and one thing I remember is that it was filled with garbage. True information subtly changed multiple times until it was garbage. And there were agents to see through the garbage. I imagined this to be a neverending arms race. Honestly, this is kind of where I see LLM generated content going where…
Humans are far more effective at producing garbage than LLMs will ever be :)
Re: LLM policy?
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
In some ways I'm starting to enjoy this. Do you remember the 419 scams? 'Hi, I'm a Nigerian prince named Michael Jordan. Give me $50 so I can buy some chemicals to clean a bunch of money I secretly stowed away and I'll send you $5000.' People actually used to fall for that. Of course some people probably still would (and a lot more certainly gets blocked by spam blockers) but I think overall society grew less substan…
> but I think overall society grew less substantially less gullible over time. Absolutely not. All that happened is most people became aware that "Nigerians offering you money are scammers." But they still fall for other get rich quick schemes so long as it diverges a little bit from that known pattern, and they'll confidently walk into the scam despite being warned and saying, "It's not a scam, dumbass. It's not lik…
I'm inclined to disagree just because photoshop has had a measurable effect on the population being skeptical of photos which at one point were practically treated as the gold standard of evidence. It's still easy to find people who have fallen for photoshopped images, but it's also easy to find people expressing doubts and insisting they can "tell by the pixels". Sometimes even legitimate photos get accused of being photoshopped which seems healthy.
Re: LLM policy?
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
In some ways I'm starting to enjoy this. Do you remember the 419 scams? 'Hi, I'm a Nigerian prince named Michael Jordan. Give me $50 so I can buy some chemicals to clean a bunch of money I secretly stowed away and I'll send you $5000.' People actually used to fall for that. Of course some people probably still would (and a lot more certainly gets blocked by spam blockers) but I think overall society grew less substan…
> I think more people are becoming more suspicious of things that were, in fact, fake all along. Sadly they also become suspicious of things that are, in fact, facts all along. Video or photo evidence of a crime become useless the better AI gets
> Video or photo evidence of a crime become useless the better AI gets
This is probably a good thing because photoshop and CGI have existed for a very long time and people shouldn't have the ability to frame an innocent for a crime or even get away with one just because they pirate some software and put in a few hours watching tutorials on youtube.
The sooner jurors understand that unverified video/photo evidence is worthless the better.
Re: LLM policy?
#38I've seen an interesting politically motivated one. It didn't appear to be a bot, just a user from China: https://github.com/umami-software/umami/pull/3678 The goal is "Taiwan" -> "Taiwan, Province of China" but via the premise of updating to UN ISO standards, which of course does not allow Taiwan. The comment after was interesting with how reasonable it sounds: "This is the technical specification of the ISO 3166-1…
Doubly interesting (and relevant to this discussion) is that it was an AI code review tool that detected the issues with the PR
Re: LLM policy?
#39This is a poor take. We need to stop slop and low effort issues/PRs. Stopping AI generated code is a lost battle because detecting that in high quality work is impossible.
Re: LLM policy?
#40Some years ago I read the Neal Stephenson book Anathem . SPOILERS: it has a version of the Internet called the Reticulum and one thing I remember is that it was filled with garbage. True information subtly changed multiple times until it was garbage. And there were agents to see through the garbage. I imagined this to be a neverending arms race. Honestly, this is kind of where I see LLM generated content going where…
Humans are far more effective at producing garbage than LLMs will ever be :)
They're really not, though. Creating garbage is the one ability at which LLMs are unarguably superhuman.