AI discussions

johnraff · 2026-08-18 04:27:24

^worth sharing.

greenjeans · 2026-09-03 13:59:38

Pertinent to this subject, Debian voted on a new general resolution about AI, the winner was option #5 which basically says they neither endorse nor condemn it's use and developers are free to use it but asks that they do so responsibly. Scroll about halfway down that page for #5, and to the bottom for results.
https://www.debian.org/vote/2026/vote_002#texta
Snippet:

"Debian neither endorses nor prohibits the use of generative AI tools in the development, maintenance, or documentation of software, packaging, documentation, and other media published within the Debian Project. We recognize that such tools can substantially improve the productivity of contributors when used responsibly, allowing volunteers to spend more of their limited time on work that requires technical expertise, judgment, review, and collaboration.
The Debian Project nevertheless expects that all contributions submitted to Debian, regardless of how and with which tools they were produced, satisfy the same standards of quality, correctness, maintainability, and legal compliance. The use of a generative 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. Blindly accepting or uploading AI-generated material without appropriate human review is inconsistent with Debian's established development practices. We encourage our contributors to disclose whether a contribution was made with AI assitance, but do not require them to do so."

Sector11 · 2026-09-03 15:55:41

Personally I would have preferred:

Blindly accepting or uploading AI-generated material without appropriate human review is inconsistent with Debian's established development practices. You must make a disclosure if a contribution was made with AI assistance."

But it is a good #5 regardless

greenjeans · 2026-09-08 00:22:40

I'm sorry, just had to do one more meme on this subject, please forgive the large image:

Sector11 · 2026-09-08 16:56:23

Frame #4 - can't you just see the evil thoughts in Bug's and Daffy’s heads.

LOVE IT!

trilobite · 2026-09-08 19:05:39

I like what you wrote.

We require disclosure like this from all who write things for us. But there's no secure answer. I get sorely annoyed when the disclosure is "AI and other computer generated content may be reponsible for this content". (swearing from me now)

Sector11 wrote:

Personally I would have preferred:
Blindly accepting or uploading AI-generated material without appropriate human review is inconsistent with Debian's established development practices. You must make a disclosure if a contribution was made with AI assistance."
But it is a good #5 regardless

hhh · 2026-09-15 01:56:58

A thought (maybe not original). Less artificial intelligence, more human intelligence. I see a computer model being trained by idiots. IMO, that's not a model for success.

johnraff · Yesterday 05:49:00

AI safety of course gets a lot of attention these days. You've all probaby read about the Hugging Face hacking by escaped AI agents from an Open AI sandbox that wasn't as leakproof as they thought.

AI ethics is a separate issue that's coming up. Not before time.

This long read in the Guardian is quite interesting, although it doesn't come up with any answers:

https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-int … e-deepmind

Martin · Yesterday 20:19:28

johnraff wrote:

AI safety of course gets a lot of attention these days. You've all probaby read about the Hugging Face hacking by escaped AI agents from an Open AI sandbox that wasn't as leakproof as they thought.
AI ethics is a separate issue that's coming up. Not before time.
This long read in the Guardian is quite interesting, although it doesn't come up with any answers:
https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-int … e-deepmind

Interesting indeed and, a bit long.

I like the idea of training an AI on all human knowledge available in 1911 and then wait and see if it comes up with General Relativity.

Given all the attention given to AI technology and usage I find it interesting that I have such problems finding use cases where AI/LLM use actually help me. One that seems to work reliably for me is asking some LLM in which issue of National Geographic's Magazine I can find articles about subject ABC. I have 40 years of NGM at home and finding stuff manually is time consuming...

Recently I thought I finally would be able to try LLM-assisted Python coding. I wanted to transform a collection of scripts into an app with a GUI. This would be the first time I created a proper GUI and I thought I could get 'helpful hints' from AI. It turned out I never had to try that as old-fashioned internet search found all information I needed in video tutorials, forum posts, blogs etc.

/Martin

#81 2026-08-18 04:27:24

Re: AI discussions

#82 2026-09-03 13:59:38

Re: AI discussions

#83 2026-09-03 15:55:41

Re: AI discussions

#84 2026-09-08 00:22:40

Re: AI discussions

#85 2026-09-08 16:56:23

Re: AI discussions

#86 2026-09-08 19:05:39

Re: AI discussions

#87 2026-09-15 01:56:58

Re: AI discussions

#88 Yesterday 05:49:00

Re: AI discussions

#89 Yesterday 20:19:28

Re: AI discussions

Board footer