"AI tool does not diminish the contributor's responsibility for the work they submit. Contributors are expected to understand, review, test, and, where appropriate, modify AI-assisted output before incorporating it into Debian. "
Seems reasonable
post
22 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
I'm not mad at the decision in the least, I'd just be curious to see what "responsible use" translates to, and how it's enforced.
replies:
I really had hope on proposal A to be taken... i have faith in debian devs judgement and proposal B feels closer to "keep the door open" than to embrace it.
A sad day anyway.
Pushing as much of the costs of generated AI onto the contributor is 100% the right way to do this. There has been a substantial shift towards generated code. Which might be temporary depending on your belief system but we are in the world we are in right now.
Contributors using LLMs should have a burden of proof higher than that of traditional contributors. This includes tests, recordings, proofs, discussion, etc.
No, not Debian!
Even the winning proposal text was AI Generated. Sloppers everywhere
Whole lot of cope going on in these comments.
AI is an effective tool if used correctly. It doesn’t replace thinking, so handle it with care.
Nobody sane would keep bashing a table with a hammer expecting different results than the table breaking under pressure at some point.
You can't stop AI.
replies:
1 comment