Re: Question about: Debian puts artificial intelligence to a vote; developers will decide how to accept AI-generated or assisted code

On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 02:52:23PM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
> On 2026-08-21 at 14:43, Jean-Christophe wrote:
> 
> > Here is a respectful and articulate response in English:
> 
> Especially given the inclusion of that line, this reads very strongly as
> if it were written by a LLM, AKA "generative AI".
> 
> Given that the message you're responding to explicitly includes the
> statement
> 
> >> I am not interested in conversing with machines
> 
> , it seems clear to me that sending a response which was generated by
> such a machine is by definition not respectful.

My feeling too, thanks.

> You might still have a valid argument to justify using it in such a
> case; that's a separate question. But labeling it as "respectful" while
> disrespecting the expressed preferences of the one you're claiming to
> respect seems problematic, to me.

This is actually an example of how that "generative AI" [1] creeps in.
You use it as a tool and then "it" takes over more and more.

I'd prefer a thousand times reading Jean Christope "as he talks", with
a personal style, errors and all, than wading through that insipid
porridge "it" has made of him.

Cheers

[1] Naming the thing is already tough: it's not the LLM (that's just
   the model, one interchangeable piece of the thing -- for images
   you'd use something different), it's the whole contraption of
   a model used "generatively" (a random generator is also a part
   of it).

-- 
t

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

iF0EABECAB0WIQRp53liolZD6iXhAoIFyCz1etHaRgUCaokw+gAKCRAFyCz1etHa
RtlrAJ9n53PbQVvyoy+75Tve6nOER09IpwCcC1AsbGqC+TsHmUg/Nc3ZKOb3GIM=
=iQxO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----