• ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        13 days ago

        I read that as a poorly worded way of saying submissions should not be obviously AI made. However this response from Niccolo really does solidify that they want absolutely no requirement to disclose AI code to avoid “shaming” the developer, and to give no consideration for environmental concerns.

        That is in direct opposition to the advice from FSFE that recommends cataloging all AI submissions in case of future legal dispute due to AI code not bring able to be licensed as GPL, and for the AI generating plagiarized copyrighted code.

        This tragically shows that KDE as an organization are not willing to divert from complete acceptance of AI-slop.

    • glibg10b@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      Update: Nate has written this post mentioning that he’s in the middle of drafting up more restrictive LLM guidelines

      He’s leaving the comments open, so everyone’s welcome to comment their feelings after they’ve read the post

      • eremophila@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 days ago

        It’s an interesting read, that immediately gets super weird in the comments.

        Thank you for linking it