Re: LLM usage in Debian -- ballot options comparison

Le mardi, 4 août 2026, 18.15:02 h heure d’été d’Europe centrale Lucas Nussbaum 
a écrit :
> > I want a Debian project to which it's _easier_ to participate to, not
> > harder. And I'm afraid that allowing LLM usage will deepen a divide
> > between "those who can afford the price of LLMs" and "those who are stuck
> > with just their aging laptop at hand" (caricature intended).
> 
> As I mentioned already in this thread, I've been working on trying to
> get inference providers sponsor access to Debian developers (aligned
> with https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2025/06/msg00060.html), and I
> recently got some success. So it looks like we should be able to provide
> access to state-of-the-art Open Weight models to Debian contributors.

Providing easier access to LLMs via paid-for API services to active Debian 
contributors is not too dissimilar to sponsoring their LWN subscription, or an 
Office 365 plan, frankly. If the project manages to offer that to its members 
who have a use for it (and opt-in), I don't have an issue. But it's still an 
"insider" privilege.

My point is rather: if a large proportion of the work is conducted by active 
members with privileged access to efficient paid-for APIs, I worry that we 
made contributions by non-members much harder. Let's be real here: it's 
already _really hard_ to become an active contributor: there are lots to 
learn, lots to read, lots to understand, lots of assumptions and project 
history, etc.

On the other hand, I also agree that it doesn't make too much sense to forbid 
those who can afford it to use the powerful tools that exist (externalities 
aside, sic).

-- 
    OdyX

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

iHUEABYKAB0WIQTjpQ0b6NokWkvBQbzqgwvGpoTNfAUCanX3bwAKCRDqgwvGpoTN
fAfXAQCcDxjNknLVMnQpJ4fmvqsiypttVVX+VuJ3LnhaFUPyTAD9EKLH1PK/Z9tH
3mMQwIUR5AY8RBtegm+splnqnDQbtQA=
=gpKc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----