@bkuhn @ossguy @richardfontana So let me summarize:

- Without knowing the legal status of accepting LLM contributions, we're potentially polluting our codebases with stuff that we are going to have a HELL of a time cleaning up later
- The idea of a copyleft-only LLM is a joke and we should not rely on it
- We really only have two realistic scenarios: either FOSS projects cannot accept LLM based contributions legally from an international perspective, or everything is effectively in the public domain as outputted from these machines, but at least in the latter scenario we get to weaken copyright for everyone.

That's leaving out a lot of other considerations about LLMs and the ethics of using them, which I think most of the other replies were focused on, I largely focused on the copyright implications aspects in this subthread. Because yes, I agree, it can be important to focus a conversation.

But we can't ignore this right now.

We're putting FOSS codebases at risk.

So, again, these age verification laws aren't about children.

They aren't about protecting children.

They aren't about children on social media.

They are about surveillance, control, and abuse.

If we wanted to make social media safer for children, we would pass legislation that actually addressed the way commercial social media is harmful to everyone: limiting notification frequency, mandating interop and data export-ability, preventing surveillance driven advertising models, mandating algorithmic transparency, and enforcing anti-trust against companies like Meta who buy up all their competitors and unify them.