I really like KDE (even donated to them), but boy do I wish they hadn’t decided to allow LLM contributions :( (guessing that aspect won’t be in the doc)
(Sorry to bring up a contentious topic) KDE & AI/LLM policy:
ngraham wrote:
This is a complicated topic, but unenforceable policies aren’t useful.
A skillful user of LLMs produces code that’s 100% indistinguishable from hand-written code. You’ll never know. Thus, any blanket policy of “No LLM code” will incentivize them to lie, and nobody will be the wiser. I don’t think that’s a good policy.
An un-skillful LLM user will provide much more obviously “I’m an LLM” code and be unable to conceal it even if they try. But this isn’t currently a problem; KDE already gets merge requests like this and we reject most of them because the changes don’t work, the author can’t justify the architectural decisions behind the changes, and so on. So there’s no problem to be solved here; the system is working as expected to filter out bad-quality content.
So personally, my conclusion is that https://community.kde.org/Guidelines_and_HOWTOs/Maintainers_and_Contributions is an appropriate set of guidelines.
Disclaimer: I fucking hate AI, it’s a new form of exploitation like we haven’t seen for a while.
Unfortunately it gets worse: https://lemmy.nz/post/42029517
Such qties :)
Nice!
