So I accidentally triggered an online shitstorm in the process of trying to craft a set of more restrictive LLM usage guidelines for KDE. Sorry about that. :/ I’m going to leave the comments …

Personal opinion: Nathan seems to be really side-stepping a lot of concerns brought of up in the comments there. And referring to people coming together collectively in an open-letter when virtually all other channels are closed as ‘brigading’ is… Not cool. Edit: he retracted the use of brigading.

EDIT 2: Nate has since closed the comments on his blog, and the one discussion thread on KDE Discuss about the AI Policy was closed suddenly without explanation after a KDE developer began to discuss the ethics of AI use. Nate then responded after the thread was closed with this:

  • esc@piefed.socialEnglish
    1014·
    4 days ago

    KDE right now has a very reasonable position, but of course being utilitarian and reasonable wouldn’t be ever enough for purists that will be throwing shit on the project regardless of what policy will be accepted in the end (OP is already doing it, some other people on fedi as well).

    • PokerChips@programming.dev
      85·
      3 days ago

      By your account I guess Cheaters in college should have used the defense of professors that caught them as “purists” … Get the FO of here with that.

      • esc@piefed.socialEnglish
        31·
        3 days ago

        You misunderstood your relationship with kde, they aren’t your student, nor they are accountable or obligated to you in any way. This purity testing thing is dumb and achieves nothing but drama.

        • zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          23·
          3 days ago

          Are you under the impression that making a nearly identical comment over and over will make you more convincing? I assure you it is the opposite.