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.

  • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
    221·
    19 hours ago

    This. So much.

    I am old enough to remember many people on the Internet questioning the entire concept of copyright and reacting to it with free licensing, defense of torrent sites, founding Pirate Parties.

    Now I read that the primary reason to reject AI is that it is a “thief”??? In the era I described above, someone wrote a song with the lyrics: copying is not theft, stealing a thing leaves one less left, copying it makes one thing more, that’s what copying’s for…

    See also https://www.techdirt.com/2026/09/23/copyright-infringement-still-isnt-theft-even-when-a-microsoft-employee-says-it-is/

    • tabular@lemmy.worldEnglish
      22·
      14 hours ago

      Copyleft is a hack of copyright that ensures rights to users of software that you wouldn’t have if there was no copyright. Software is different from other creative works like music and books in that it does computing. Sharing a binary file freely isn’t enough - you need the source code to keep it maintained or change it to your will (through collaborative efforts). You prevent others withholding the source code via that copyrighted license.

      You can reject the unreasonable sentences of copyright infringement, the illegality of breaking locks on your own hardware, or the long copyright terms while still promoting copyright for copyleft’s sake. Companies lobbies for those laws to prevent "stealing’. throwing people in jail or fining them into oblivion - are they going to undo all that? Can I share Disney films without going to jail now?

      • m532@lemmy.ml
        4·
        9 hours ago

        while still promoting copyright for copyleft’s sake.

        What the hell.

        Copyleft means “the absence of copyright”, not “copyright wielded by radlibs”.

          • m532@lemmy.ml
            2·
            6 hours ago

            TIL radlibs’ holy scripture smears copyleft. The page reads like it was written by a bourgie copyright advocate.

            I should have known, radlibs’ holy scripture was founded by ancaps after all.

            • tabular@lemmy.worldEnglish
              2·
              4 hours ago

              That’s many new words for me, seems some groups of people also have no usage of words that others use!

              I value software freedom; basically being in control of your own computing. I dislike others taking my code and then denying their users the same freedoms they enjoyed. If not for that I could do without most of Copyright as it is today.