58
General resolution: LLM usage in Debian: First call for votes: corrected ballot (lists.debian.org)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/linux@lemmy.ml
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

What do you think it'll happen and what do you want to happen?

Debian developers have been considering a general resolution over LLM usage within the project. After collecting a variety of proposals, voting has now commenced for Debian developers to decide how comfortable they are with AI / Large Language Model contributions in the project or not.

The choices being considered for this Debian general resolution (GR) include:

[ ] Choice 1: Ban LLM contributions from Debian via Social Contract

[ ] Choice 2: Allow AI-Assisted Contributions with conditions

[ ] Choice 3: Reject LLMs as far as practical, update Code of Conduct

[ ] Choice 4: Accept AI contributions for Debian specific work

[ ] Choice 5: Responsible Use of Generative AI

[ ] Choice 6: A cautious approach to generative AI

[ ] Choice 7: Debian is created by humans

[ ] Choice 8: Avoid the use of LLM: climate destruction is a deal breaker

[ ] Choice 9: None of the above

All the details on each of those choices can be found via the Debian.org vote page.

Additional details in this mailing list post with the voting details on the general resolution. The voting period began at midnight and is set to run through end of day 28 August.

all 25 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 23 points 3 months ago (15 children)

What is this, a Monty Python skit? How the fuck are they gonna come with a consensus with all these choices?

There's really just choices 1 & 2. The rest are just elaboration. And what the fuck is even 'none of the above'?

Really, there's just 'yes' and 'no'. If it's a 'yes', there would certainly be condition, which can come later. If it's a 'no', who give a shit why; it's a vote, not a fucking book club. They can definitely put the reason in the comment, but do they really need to put the reasons as the choice?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (11 children)

    First time?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (10 children)

    Long time Debian user. First time really paying attention to their governance process.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (9 children)

    Long time Debian user and governance appreciator. Welcome. If you want some schizophrenia inducing reading material you should go back and check the long and well documented history of Debian voting.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (8 children)

    especially the adoption of systemd that was decided by only 4 people back around 2014. lol

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (5 children)

    Where did you pull that number from? https://vote.debian.org/~secretary/gr_initsystems/results.txt

    The smallest difference between a systemd option and a “not-only-systemd option” I see is

    Option 2 defeats Option 4 by ( 211 - 177) = 34 votes.

    And bear in mind that condorcet selects the most agreeable option, not just the majority option.

    And it makes sense: the most likely contender at the time was upstart, which didn't stand the test of time AFAIK (I don't think the systemd hater crowd still uses that)

    So it ended up the right decision. Would they have decided differently if other good init systems had existed already? Maybe, but they didn't.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    https://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1403.0/00130.html

    it was fun trip down memory lane looking for this... thank you github for being down today. lol

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

    Yeah, no matter the truth content of this piece of tinfoil, the vote I linked shows that systemd continued being agreeable among voters.

    The handful of conspiracy myth believers are now on Devuan if that still exists. Presumably mad about something else that exists only in their head.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago*

    I learned to embrace systemd after I was forced to use it professionally and that's probably the reason why their pre-compliance w the Epstein oligarchy's attempts to silence viral counter narratives on social media -- like the gazan genocide -- feels like a betrayal.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    So it ended up the right decision. Would they have decided differently if other good init systems had existed already? Maybe, but they didn't.

    Nothing, really, is stopping them from making it easier to use other init systems.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    I would say it’s okay with more than yes/no. You could say yes, but only if code review by human. The difference is that if you can only say yes or no, you would have to say yes, but then don’t know if the details of the final rules of AI in the project would actually be a dealbreaker for you. However, these options are a little too much.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    The 1st round should be yes, or no.

    Choice A in the developer poll still allows for ai

    "It does not include:

    Upstream projects using LLMs for development
AI-related software
Upstream patches/security fixes etc."
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] [S] 5 points 3 months ago

    https://www.phoronix.com/news/Debian-Votes-On-LLM-Usage

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 7 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Those are some wildly feels-based choices.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    These are just the headlines. If you click on the link there are the choices written out. Apparently it was open for submissions so there could be some options that feel duplicated.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    They appear deliberately vague and misleading

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 4 points 3 months ago* (3 children)

    Are you saying this after reading the rationale behind the options?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    I read 1, 7, and 8, as they appeared to be the options not just saying 'ai yay'. I stopped reading each of those options when they appeared to turn into contrary bullshit. I very briefly scanned some of the other options.

    None of them appeared to prohibit the inclusion of ai. The verbosity comes across as deliberate, rather than informative to me, knowing how much people scan these days.

    I have debian installed on my 2 pc's, but do not actively use it, and this would be my first insight/interaction with the people behind it, and the 'community'. If this poll is the 1st step in the process, I have to question why the 1st step was not simply ai: yes, or no. With a result of yes = empty partitions where I used to have debian.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    The correct link:

    https://www.debian.org/vote/2026/vote_002

    I thought debian was better than ubuntu, hopefully I was right. I only have it installed as a back-up/look more into later distro, so it is very easily deleted if they wander down the nuclear wasteland path.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    4 comments in c/linux@sh.itjust.works view that post
    [–] 3 points 3 months ago* (2 children)
      • -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
        d69f9187-ed2f-40b6-a2eb-4211d3f84d86
        [ ] Choice 1: Ban LLM contributions from Debian via Social Contract
        [ ] Choice 2: Allow AI-Assisted Contributions with conditions
        [ ] Choice 3: Reject LLMs as far as practical, update Code of Conduct
        [ ] Choice 4: Accept AI contributions for Debian specific work
        [ ] Choice 5: Responsible Use of Generative AI
        [ ] Choice 6: A cautious approach to generative AI
        [ ] Choice 7: Debian is created by humans
        [ ] Choice 8: Avoid the use of LLM: climate destruction is a deal breaker
        [ ] Choice 9: None of the above
      • -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=- =-

    What a mess.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Why vote? Debian started out as a project created by humans and it stays that way. Anyone who wants to use LLM/AI shall fork.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •