335
KDE is actively proposing a Pro-AI contribution policy, with most rejecting any suggestions for AI use to be disclosed, or any consideration for environmental concerns (invent.kde.org)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/linux@programming.dev
151 comments fedilink hide all child comments
๐Ÿ˜ญ 2
 

Direct link to the LLM Policy Discussion: https://invent.kde.org/plasma/plasma-workspace/-/work_items/187

Example of KDE dev rejecting environmental consideration:

Example of KDE devs not wanting to require LLM use be disclosed.

And all of this is coming right after the debacle with an AI slop project being allowed to give a presentation at Akademy, and the person asking how this was allowed being blocked by KDE:

https://lemmy.nz/post/42029517

as well as the discussion thread bringing up legitimate concerns about AI usage being closed:

https://discuss.kde.org/t/sorry-to-bring-up-a-contentious-topic-kde-ai-llm-policy/46333/164

As someone who genuinely loves KDE, and has even donated to the project multiple times, I sadly have to accept that the majority of KDE have hopped onto the Pro-AI train, and they will not be dissuaded otherwise.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] 3 points 1 month ago* (5 children)

Anybody else feeling really smug now about using GNOME?

No, I'm not. The GNOME project have not, from what I've seen, drawn any hard boundary on the matter.

Lacking any clear policy prohibiting AI slop in the project, it's still entirely feasible they'll let it in.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [โ€“] 3 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    I haven't confirmed it but this screenshot claims they banned it

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [โ€“] 1 point 1 month ago (3 children)

    That person seems to be mistaken. I could only find policies for GNOME Circle and extensions, and those seem similar in spirit to the one proposed here:

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [โ€“] 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    From the second link:

    Extensions must not be AI-generated

    While it is not prohibited to use AI as a learning aid or a development tool (i.e. code completions), extension developers should be able to justify and explain the code they submit, within reason.

    Submissions with large amounts of unnecessary code, inconsistent code style, imaginary API usage, comments serving as LLM prompts, or other indications of AI-generated output will be rejected

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [โ€“] 0 points 1 month ago* (1 child)

    Yes. I'd argue that this is similar in spirit to the linked proposal, which for example requires that

    Nobody in KDE should know if you use an LLM โ€” not because you're concealing it, but because your usage of it produces output indistinguishable from what you could produce yourself. Contributions with obvious and lazy LLM usage may be ignored or closed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •