Home | Notifications | New Note | Local | Federated | Search | Logout

Note Detail

Reply to @SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
Blurry Moon@sun@shitposter.world (2026-07-29 17:06:39)
@SuperDicq @lain Can you provide me with a checklist of do's and do not's for writing software going forward?
---Reply---
SuperDicq@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo (2026-07-29 17:20:28)
@sun@shitposter.world @lain@lain.com The problem is that output from LLMs currently has a legally ambiguous status. You can not risk integrating it into any existing free software right now, so that's why a lot of projects, with some exceptions, choose not to allow it or heavily limit its usage only to specific tasks.

And on a personal note I think obvious LLM output is extremely tasteless. Seeing someone not even use some effort to at least even write their own README file makes me cringe. I always compare it to the same type of feeling you get when you see a corporate logo which uses Comic Sans.

---Replies---

Blurry Moon@sun@shitposter.world (2026-07-29 17:24:11)
@SuperDicq I think it's a bigger risk if you close source something, I am doing AGPL so like unless it pulled something from some weird license should be okay.

Phobos@Phobos@eientei.org (2026-07-29 18:28:20)
@SuperDicq @lain @sun Personally, I'd argue that writing READMEs are the most mind-numbingly boring bit of writing software and rather one of the better use cases for an LLM.