I have been using Linux for over 8 months now, and my primary distribution of choice was Debian.

Debian recently conducted a community vote on allowing AI contributions, and it ended up allowing responsible AI contributions.

What is this responsible? How can AI commits be responsible? There are thousands of reasons to not use AI, and the primary reason is AI is a thief.

How did you react to Debian’s decision? Did you switch distros? Which one was your option, and why?

Also, when the Linux kernel itself allows AI commits, is there any practicality in a Linux distribution strictly limiting or restricting AI commits?

I have no serious usability issue with Debian now but am concerned about the use of AI even in my Linux distribution. Should I keep going with Debian or consider any other distribution, as I only have 8+ months of experience as a daily Linux user? I tried almost all Linux distros and am comfortable with everything except Void Linux and highly complex ones like Gentoo.

  • mildseason@sopuli.xyz
    21·
    14 hours ago

    Is using AI as bad as child labour?

    I don’t believe so. But i don’t believe in copyright laws either. If a developer chooses to use AI it’s their choice.

    Obviously best case scenario is they use a local open weights model. I believe this will be more commonplace in a few years.

    I think a skilled developer using AI to improve open source software is a case of the ends justifying the means.

    Edit: the link you provided highlights the problems with large capitalist corporations owning the compute power and generic AI use by the untrained population more than the issue of skilled developers contributing to open source software.

    While these things are a problem i don’t believe a distro should stop contributions just because a developer consulted an LLM.

    • Hetare King@piefed.socialEnglish
      11·
      12 hours ago

      Analogies are comparisons of structure, not intensity. There are a lot of things that are “not as bad” as child labour, that doesn’t make them OK.

      But i don’t believe in copyright laws either. Do you believe in the goals of the GPL? Because you have to admit, the way AI works, regardless of whether you frame it as “theft” or “copyright infringement” or not, is at odds with those goals.

      • mildseason@sopuli.xyz
        21·
        9 hours ago

        GPL is a response to copyright laws. If there were no copyright laws we wouldn’t need GPL.

        Prohibiton doesn’t work. Regulations need to passed by government bodies not open source developers.

        • Hetare King@piefed.socialEnglish
          21·
          3 hours ago

          You do realise that even if copyright were abolished, large, powerful corporations would continue to exist and even manage to use the absence of copyright to their advantage?

          Without the GPL being enforced, a company like Microsoft could finally start digging a moat around Linux without constraints.

          • m532@lemmy.ml
            1·
            2 hours ago

            “Copyright” was made to empower and protect large corpos like microsoft.

            If you think copyright “protects” linux in any way, you’re a fool.