<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Hot take on the Rust LLM discussion, having actually read the policy:]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p>Hot take on the Rust LLM discussion, having actually read the policy:</p><p>The "no ethical/licensing arguments" thing seems like "we want to discuss other things, and ethical/licensing arguments, which we've had elsewhere, would otherwise dominate", which I think is fair, though a better solution would have been to create a separate issue/thread for that.</p><p>Also, having run CTFs (and annoyed that LLMs have ruined them), rules that cannot be meaningfully enforced need to be used very, very sparingly.</p>]]></description><link>https://board.circlewithadot.net/topic/7cec782c-5b5f-4c6b-ae57-2b26422a5189/hot-take-on-the-rust-llm-discussion-having-actually-read-the-policy</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 May 2026 10:39:24 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://board.circlewithadot.net/topic/7cec782c-5b5f-4c6b-ae57-2b26422a5189.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2026 07:26:00 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl></channel></rss>