Re: [PATCH] CONTRIBUTING.d/ai: Add guidelines banning AI for contributing
From: Carlos O'Donell <hidden>
Date: 2025-10-15 00:16:32
On 10/14/25 6:15 PM, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
Hi Carlos, On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 05:54:41PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:quoted
quoted
I've already been DDoSed in my own home server by AI crawlers (which is the reason I decided to move the HTTPS server to port 80, just to break links and stop the madness. I could install Anubis, but I'll resist for some time.It does not logically follow that because there are bad actors we should ban a particular tool that the bad actors use.It's not the main reason, but it's something I wanted to note in the discussion.quoted
quoted
So far, I haven't noticed any contributors using AI. Probably, the combination of relatively few people contributing documentation, combined with still working on a mailing list, has helped us avoid the wave of AI contributions. However, it's better to take preventive measures. AI is entirely banned in this project. The guidelines are clear and concise.Why? (1) Document intent. I don't support a ban without a justification. That justification can be on moral or ethical grounds, or even on the grounds of energy used vs outcomes achieved.Okay, I'll add some generic justification.quoted
(2) Document acceptable use. We should also talk about where it would be acceptable to use such tools, for example could the tool check spelling, or grammar?I explicitly want to disallow such uses. I think using AI to lint code (documentation or C source code) is dangerous, as it puts trust in the AI system to find issues. The AI system might trick you to accidentally introduce typos or bugs, or it could create a false sense of correctness or safety.
We're getting into ethical territory here. What I put my trust in or not, is none of the project's business. The color of my socks is none of the project's business too. We should accept contributions that meet our contribution policy? This includes a clear license, clear and unambiguous copyright, and a level of quality and correctness that we review with human reviewers? Consider QEMU's policy: https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/devel/code-provenance.html#use-of-ai-generated-content Likewise Gentoo's policy: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council/AI_policy -- Cheers, Carlos.