Re: Dealing with LLMs in IETF discussions draft
Stephen Farrell <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hiya, On 08/08/2026 21:30, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > On 08-Aug-26 00:37, S Moonesamy wrote: >> Hi Chong, >> >> One of the points in your email was about who makes the technical >> claims in an Internet-Draft. At the other end there is a person who >> reviews the technical claims and dispute/disagree with those >> claims. That person (it can be more than one person) previously did >> not use a LLM to assess the correctness of the claims or to submit >> his/her disagreement. Is it okay for the person to use a LLM to do that? > > I think that question is unimportant. I very much disagree with Brian. ISTM crucial that readers (and there are many of those) are generally confident that the opinions expressed in a message are those of the sender, and not opinions being mimiced by an LLM. (The fact that there are many readers for each sent-thing, IMO imposes a higher burden on the sender.) That aspect is not at all addressed by the sender naming themselves as responsible for the content Cheers, S.
OpenPGP_signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 236 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- wnsEABYIACMWIQQwbnhHy1kPJkWsM6fk2On5l6gz3QUCankCvQUDAAAAAAAKCRDk2On5l6gz3VuV AQDP4NMbEZhO3CU901fF/1xEaOz0MtpBOpXDCsyNeTTdzgD9Fodq7Yv8auEGDOf+cxlTjbYcnlAU DTx1Db4eMujB6gc= =0w7C -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----