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

461–470 of 504 posts

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

#461

Post by recursive »

emperorxanu wrote: post #458
recursive wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copilot isn't a model. Currently it's giving me a choice of 15 different models. By all evidence, AI is nowhere close to replacing me, but to hear other people tell it, it is weeks or maybe months away. I'll just wait and see.

Remember when copilot released? It was running some openai thing at the time, now you can choose from many models sure, but if you want a BMW, buy a BMW, don't buy a Nissan with badly strapped on BMW decals.

No, I don't remember when it was released.

I don't want a Nissan or a BMW. This was provided by my employer, and I've been asked to use it. To be honest, I don't even understand how your car analogy applies to any of this.

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

#462

Post by jplusequalt »

slibhb wrote: post #459
jplusequalt wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree that writing, or Google search are on the same level here. A problem about having this argument on HN is that I think most people are already firmly entrenched in the pro-AI position, and will not consider any possible downsides.

There are lots of anti-AI commenters on HN. Also, I didn't say there are no downsides. There are downsides to writing! And some people were against writing, like Socrates. You should ask yourself why you're okay with innovations that happened in the past but not okay with innovations happening now. It could just be reflexive conservativism. Of course there's no guarantee that AI will be more positive than negative, b…

>You should ask yourself why you're okay with innovations that happened in the past but not okay with innovations happening now.

Because these innovations are not congruent with our most important biological advantage! We are here precisely because we developed the capacity to think critically about hard problems. To relegate our critical faculties to an activity you engage with during a small window of time each day similar to a muscle you exercise at the gym is asinine in my opinion. I firmly believe in the future, people like you will become a new underclass as they have willingly given up their ability to think.

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

#463

Post by jplusequalt »

slibhb wrote: post #460
jplusequalt wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But people will figure it out eventually. Will they? >50% of US adults are overweight or obese. Is this the example you want to hang your hat on?

People are figuring it out in real time. The next generation is going to be way less fat than the current one, because everyone exercises. It took time for people to adjust to a world where physical exertion is optional and delicious food is cheap, but we are getting there. I see no reason to assume the same thing won't happen with AI.

>People are figuring it out in real time.

Where are the stats backing this claim? Obesity levels have not dropped significantly in recent times. Also, any significant change will require government oversight, and we are increasingly heading towards a direction where private interests overrule whats best for the public at large.

>I see no reason to assume the same thing won't happen with AI.

You have the ability to choose what and much you eat. Will you have the ability to forsake AI if your employer forces it upon you, or if to stay competitive in school you have to rely on it? In the same way it's hard to live in society without a smart phone, it's already becoming hard to operate in society without relying on AI. Now extrapolate this out by a decade.

I suggest you watch the AI Dilemma.

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

#464

Post by slibhb »

jplusequalt wrote: post #462
slibhb wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are lots of anti-AI commenters on HN. Also, I didn't say there are no downsides. There are downsides to writing! And some people were against writing, like Socrates. You should ask yourself why you're okay with innovations that happened in the past but not okay with innovations happening now. It could just be reflexive conservativism. Of course there's no guarantee that AI will be more positive than negative, b…

>You should ask yourself why you're okay with innovations that happened in the past but not okay with innovations happening now. Because these innovations are not congruent with our most important biological advantage! We are here precisely because we developed the capacity to think critically about hard problems. To relegate our critical faculties to an activity you engage with during a small window of time each day…

Again, people said the same thing about computers, about writing, and so on. Maybe it's true this time, but I think the presumption should be that it's not.

If people who use AI become an "underclass" then people will adapt and...not use AI. But that won't happen. People will use it to augment rather than replace, just like we use other, similar technologies.

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

#465

Post by pmarreck »

eschaton wrote: post #408
pmarreck wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is where most reasonable people would say “OK, fine” CLEARLY, a lot of developers are not reasonable

It is entirely reasonable for a project to require you to attest that the thing you are contributing is your own work. The unreasonable ones are the ones with the oppositional-defiant “You can’t tell me I can’t use an LLM!” reaction.

It IS their own work.

The simplest refutation of your point of view is, who or what is responsible if the work submission is wrong?

It will always be the person’s, never the computer’s. Conveniently, AI always acts as if it has no skin in the game… because it literally and figuratively doesn’t… so for people to treat it like it does, should be penalized

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

#466

Post by electrosphere »

dakolli wrote: post #416
jacquesm wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think of myself more like a carpenter or craftsman. > I used a coding agent for the majority of my current project and I still got the "build stuff" itch scratched because Engineers are still responsible for the output and they are needed to interface between technical teams, UX, business people etc Then you are the opposite of a carpenter or a craftsman, no matter what you think about it yourself.

Yeah could you imagine a project manager saying they are like a carpenter or a craftsman lmfao

Taking AI out of the equation for a minute - they don't build anything, engineers do. A carpenter builds a chair, table etc using the skill he has accumulated over the years.

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

#467

Post by nineteen999 »

short_sells_poo wrote: post #245
logicprog wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I say let people hold this stance. We, agentic coders, can easily enough fork their project and add whatever the features or refinements we wanted, and use that fork for ourselves, but also make it available for others in case other people want to use it for the extra features and polish as well. With AI, it's very easy to form a good architectural understanding of a large code base and figure out how to modify it in…

> We, agentic coders, can easily enough fork their project And this is why eventually you are likely to run the artisanal coders who tend to do most of the true innovation out of the room. Because by and large, agentic coders don't contribute, they make their own fork which nobody else is interested in because it is personalized to them and the code quality is questionable at best. Eventually, I'm sure LLM code quali…

Most "artisanal" coders that are complaining are working on the n-1000th text editor, todo list manager, toy programming language or web framework that nobody needs, not doing "true innovation".

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

#468

Post by eschaton »

orf wrote: post #452
jacquesm wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not an abstract argument, you are showing a willingness to do the wrong thing in spite of being told not to, repeatedly, by many other participants here. I see only two things here: (1) you would lie (2) you fundamentally don't understand the concept of consent > "I’ll make a change any way I choose, upright, sideways, using AI. My choice. Not theirs." The fact that other people would lie is besides the point…

[flagged]

[flagged]

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

#469

Post by eschaton »

orf wrote: post #435
kuschku wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So is fraudulently claiming your code has a different author & copyright (you) than it actually has (whether that's someone else's code, or LLM-generated code).

[flagged]

You can, in fact, be pursued both civilly and criminally for fraud.

Your admissions here are enough that if you tried to contribute to any of my own Open Source projects, I would reject your contributions, and if I had accepted any prior ones I would pursue legal remedies.

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

#470

Post by orf »

eschaton wrote: post #469
orf wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You can, in fact, be pursued both civilly and criminally for fraud. Your admissions here are enough that if you tried to contribute to any of my own Open Source projects, I would reject your contributions, and if I had accepted any prior ones I would pursue legal remedies.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN