Mastodawn

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.

doc: add policy on LLM-generated contributions by bengl · Pull Request #62447 · nodejs/node

Add doc/contributing/ai-contributions.md banning LLM-generated content from commits. Scoped to committed content only, excluding discussion, vendored deps, and accessibility tools. Enforcement uses...

GitHub

Show thread

Katerina Marchán 3d ago

@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.

Show thread

Kevin Granade

@zkat @indutny @bengl my musing on the pathology of privilege is that the "why" never makes sense because they don't care, the real reason is always "because I want to and I don't care about anyone else", but they know that's not going to work so instead it's endless half-baked excuses. LLMs in this context are a novel way to generate excuses, they don't meaningfully change the situation but they pretend it does.