I'm so appreciative of @bengl right now. Their PR that proposes adding policy on LLM-generated contributions is receiving lots of feedback from other project maintainers and has helped me uncover additional concerns about LLM: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/62447
Like, I haven't thought until yesterday evening that LLM written code is completely antithetical to MIT-license under which Node.js is written. LLMs are designed to destroy attribution, but MIT license is built on top of it.
@indutny @bengl dang, nodejs folks trying to do the right thing here.
I "love" that the first thing LLM boosters go to is how it's "unenforceable", as if that was ever a concern when it came to whether people submitting PRs actually owned the rights to the code they submitted. I don't recall some massive discussion about "true authorship" besides "pinky swear".
It just reeks of LLM boosters wanting really bad to just be deceitful motherfuckers.
“Cat's out of bag”, “Everyone uses it", “It will alienate new contributors" are all very silly arguments for LLM that would make much less sense if we'd try to translate them to any other real world scenario.
It is really hard to fight the feeling of empowerment that LLM gives to the users, and admit that this technology is not only deeply unethical, but also addictive.
Fedor Indutny
Katerina Marchán
F4GRX Sébastien