mccRE: https://mastodon.scot/@kim_harding/116108957641748718
I want this but as a Linux distribution. I don't think I'm asking for much here. I am just asking for the "open source community" to be to the left of Goldman Sachs
My understanding is that Bitwarden and KeePassXC, the two open source password managers, are *both* using random code generators at this point, which is terrifying as those are the exact tools where a small error could have the largest negative impact, and also tools that once you've committed to using it you can't quickly back out if they enter a code quality decline
RE: https://wellduck.me/@greyduck/116110983001607000
I would like the answer to this question as well.
When I say "fork every software project containing code by by 'AI code assistants', starting at the commit before the slop is known or believed to have been added, and resume from there", I really do mean every project
https://donotsta.re/objects/8e2166c6-3e0f-4ea3-8a29-3008702a39f7
nick :neocat: (@[email protected])
@mcc oh no
✧✦Catherine✦✧@mcc unfortunately it's a more viable solution to "just" switch to a different backend than to maintain an organizationally separate long time llvm fork...
@whitequark This would all be much easier if GNU would switch their position from "We had a discussion in a meeting once and we think probably LLM generated code is not eligible to be GPLed" to "no GNU project will accept LLM generated patches'
4am ❧@mcc @whitequark it seems obvious to me that LLM-generated code can never be compatible with the GPL unless (at the very least) you can prove that all of the code in its training set is compatible with the GPL. It seems obvious to me that project maintainers should care very deeply about the provenance of code that is added to their projects. And yet!