Not gonna lie, I burst out laughing reading the last bit.

[umbreon@donphan.social]

Not gonna lie, I burst out laughing reading the last bit.

Credit to KDE and the source of the photo: https://kde.org/anniversaries/30/

[canageek@wandering.shop]

@Umbreon Now I just wish KDE would ban slop contributions, which they currently allow

[ell1e@hachyderm.io]

@Canageek @Umbreon Sadly they seem quite hesitant to doing so: https://discuss.kde.org/t/sorry-to-bring-up-a-contentious-topic-kde-ai-llm-policy/46333 (If anybody reading jumps in, please try to be nice and constructive.)

[robertguetzkow@infosec.exchange]

@ell1e @Canageek @Umbreon Seems like they are broadly on the same page and very much against LLM/GenAI contributions. It's mostly disagreement on whether an outright ban in the policy that may not be practically enforceable is better than rejecting contributions based on other properties that can be more clearly argued e.g. code quality, contributor not being able to explain their decisions, or similar.

[ell1e@hachyderm.io]

@robertguetzkow @Canageek @Umbreon This is not the impression I'm getting, regarding KDE.

[robertguetzkow@infosec.exchange]

@ell1e @Canageek @Umbreon How so? The people involved in the KDE development seemed to take that position.

[ell1e@hachyderm.io]

@robertguetzkow @Canageek @Umbreon I can't see inside their heads and I could be wrong. But if I'm not misreading at least one person appears to likely be a heavy LLM code user. Just how it reads to me. Often enough, most aren't happy to directly confirm it...

[robertguetzkow@infosec.exchange]

@ell1e @Canageek @Umbreon yes, you're right. May have scrolled past their post when I first skimmed the posts. Seemed to me that the majority see the issue though.