• CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Not at all, because it’s impossible to know for sure if committed code had some form of AI generated parts, AI assisted review, prototyping, etc.

    By making it mandatory you can potentially alienate good developers who may feel their work ethics would be scrutinized negatively (like in these comments).

    • naught101@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      If you’re happy to use AI tools to develop, why would you not be happy to declare your use of those tools?

      • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 hours ago

        “Happy” is an odd choice of words here.

        An LLM is just a tool. Some iterations have some value in some circumstances. In those cases it’s fine. But look around at the comments here and you’ll see many people basically accusing Debian of selling out. If a dev sees that reaction then they may not want to disclose their own use of LLMs.

        • naught101@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Why would you not want to disclose though? Is it because of shame? Because you are unable to defend your choice? If it’s “just a tool”, is that not enough to defend your choice?

          To be clear: the alternative policy we’re talking about isn’t “LLMs are bad, don’t use them”, it’s “Let us know when you are using LLMs”

          • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            Is it because of shame?

            Yes, and because people might be afraid there going to be attacked for using it.

            “Let us know when you are using LLMs”

            But this is impossible to enforce.