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

Note Detail

Ludovic Courtès@civodul@toot.aquilenet.fr (2026-08-31 05:23:43)
So Debian adopted a resolution on the use of “generative AI”:
https://www.debian.org/vote/2026/vote_002#texte

Condorcet spoke: of all the options put to the vote, it must be a good compromise, an average of where the community stands.

How much of a compromise is it really, though?

🧵
---Reply---
Ludovic Courtès@civodul@toot.aquilenet.fr (2026-08-31 05:24:28)
The message of this resolution is that it’s neither “pro” nor “anti”: it’s neutral, promoting “responsible use”.

In fact, it looks like an example of “extreme centrism”: “Debian neither endorses nor prohibits the use of generative AI”, “Contributors are expected to exercise appropriate care”, “[t]his resolution therefore affirms that generative AI is neither exempt from nor subject to special rules”.

The narrative seems to be: “AI” is just another tool, nothing changes here—move along.

---Replies---

Ludovic Courtès@civodul@toot.aquilenet.fr (2026-08-31 05:24:53)
Under the guise of neutrality, what it actually does is open the gates to genAI-produced contributions.  This, is political.

The “responsible use” narrative shifts responsibility from the group to the individual.  It’s not unlike the tobacco industry’s strategy—or indeed that of the “AI” industry.