Re: GR: Ban LLM contributions from Debian

On Fri, 24 Jul 2026 17:25, Ian Jackson <[email protected]> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA512
>
>Matthias Geiger writes ("GR: Ban LLM contributions from Debian"):
>> What follows is a GR proposal to ban LLM contributions.
>
>Thanks for this.  Obviously, I agree, and I have seconded your option.
>But I worry that it might not reach the 3:1 majority required to amend
>a foundation document.  Also it has given rise to a lot of
>interpretative nitpicking.
>
>I wrote an alternative proposal below which is intended to
>   - avoid legalistic prescriptions which need to be nitpicked
>   - recognise that we're in a difficult situation
>It is (effectively) a set of requests to existing teams and a
>supplement to the Code of Conduct.
>
>
>- -8<- BEGIN PROPOSAL
>
>Summary: Reject LLMs (generative "AI") as far as practical
>
>BACKGROUND
>
>LLMs have many serious problems, including: undermining the mechanisms
>of free software community building; environmental damage;
>exploitation of authors; disruption to open web hosting by
>aggressive scraping; generation and promulgation of bullshit;
>polluting the information commons; hazards to users' mental health;
>economic bubbles; distortion of the computer hardware market;
>fraud; ownership by horrible people and companies; and so on.
>Ethical and safe use of this technology is almost impossible.
>
>Ideally, LLM output should not form any part of software that we rely
>on, nor should LLM output ever take the place of human-written prose.
>
>Unfortunately some of the wider software world, including many of our
>upstreams, take a different view.  Therefore a complete ban on LLM
>output as part of Debian is currently impractical.
>
>REQUESTS
>
>1. We request that all contributors to Debian avoid the use of LLMs in
>   their Debian work.
>
>2. We request that all decisionmakers within Debian discourage LLM use
>   as much as practical.  Practicality is a judgement call and we
>   recognise that it will involve uncomfortable compromises.
>
>3. We request that everyone, even outside Debian, should refrain from
>   using this technology.  In particular, the Free Software and Open
>   Source communities should reject LLMs.  We recognise that not
>   everyone will heed this call.
>
>REQUIREMENTS (SUPPLEMENT TO THE CODE OF CONDUCT)
>
>4. Within Debian, messages to humans (including for example bug
>   reports, mailing list messages, discussions on Salsa, and blog
>   posts on Planet Debian) must be drafted solely by humans without
>   LLM assistance.
>
>5. Any use of LLMs for Debian work must be disclosed.
>
>6. Individual projects and maintainers may ban LLM contributions
>   completely.  Such bans (including by upstream projects) must be
>   respected.
>
>7. Violations of these requirements should be treated as violations of
>   the Code of Conduct and should result in swift but proportionate
>   disciplinary action.
>
>8. Any contributor who feels they cannot write in English without
>   assistance, may write in their native language, and expect readers
>   to use translation tools of their choice.  In that case a
>   human-written English summary would be very welcome but is not
>   required.  In any case we promise not to shame anyone for any
>   linguistic mistakes.
>
>- ->8- END PROPOSAL
>
Seconded.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEARYKAB0WIQQUWTv/Sl6/b+DpcW7svtu2B7myvgUCamOIigAKCRDsvtu2B7my
vmITAP9gCN68nCHxs1ntGEw0ge8+fWE0WyUTSKJTA0NICF1LCAD+OZ0AxWuzcE5Y
sODTY4mpblhfqqImxpxiPS8DsCO8XAc=
=8Ydx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

(now properly signed)

best,