tell me you’re a coward without telling me
-
cited as reason to allow LLM contributions experimentally:
Instead of using ethical concerns as a basis for policy, we should justify policy on the basis of how something is impacting our ability as a project to deliver a really great programming language.
if the orphan grinder lets us make a better programming language then FIRE THOSE BABIES UP
@Athena "we shouldn't be using ethical concerns as a basis for policy" is an extremely succinct summary of 2026 so far, i'll give them that. but seriously, what the everlasting fuck.
-
@Athena wow what a fucking disaster
and the "we could not reach consensus so let's just, ban debate"
there's a vibe of entryism from their discussion: the pro-AI folks have ensured they get to veto banning AI altogether under the banner of lack of consensus
-
@clarfonthey @Athena “you underestimate how many people on the team are pissed about that and want it to change but need to be diplomatic about it so they don't lose their jobs or positions”
historically this is a great way to not change anything
@jepyang this is a maintainer who calls accessibility "trivial" and suitable for LLM
they're not interested in changing shit
-
tell me you’re a coward without telling me
No comment on this PR may mention the following topics:
Long-term social or economic impact of LLMs
The environmental impact of LLMs
Anything to do with the copyright status of LLM output
Moral judgements about people who use LLMs
We have asked the moderation team to help us enforce these rules.Add an LLM policy for `rust-lang/rust` by jyn514 · Pull Request #1040 · rust-lang/rust-forge
Information useful to people contributing to Rust. Contribute to rust-lang/rust-forge development by creating an account on GitHub.
GitHub (github.com)
@Athena I guess I'm rewriting my last 6 months of low-level code in Zig, then.
-
@clarfonthey you literally just wandered over to someone's feed to shut them down for speaking up and being mad that they're aren't speaking up the way you want them to?
Yeah you're gonna get chastised, you don't shut people down and then complain that no one is speaking up.
@jepyang @Athena -
@clarfonthey you literally just wandered over to someone's feed to shut them down for speaking up and being mad that they're aren't speaking up the way you want them to?
Yeah you're gonna get chastised, you don't shut people down and then complain that no one is speaking up.
@jepyang @Athena@clarfonthey also thanks for being explicitly clear that accessibility is suitable for ai slop, my disabled ass is never looking at Rust again
-
@clarfonthey so, uh, go on ahead and propose your policy or whatever? nobody here is stopping you? you…literally showed up to this thread to start an argument…??
-
@jepyang this is a maintainer who calls accessibility "trivial" and suitable for LLM
they're not interested in changing shit
@mxjaygrant holy fuck
-
@clarfonthey so, uh, go on ahead and propose your policy or whatever? nobody here is stopping you? you…literally showed up to this thread to start an argument…??
@jepyang are you literally incapable of reading down the thread to see what happened to the argument or do you just like bothering people for no reason
-
R relay@relay.mycrowd.ca shared this topic
-
@clarfonthey you literally just wandered over to someone's feed to shut them down for speaking up and being mad that they're aren't speaking up the way you want them to?
Yeah you're gonna get chastised, you don't shut people down and then complain that no one is speaking up.
@jepyang @Athena@mxjaygrant@triangletoot.party @jepyang @Athena decided to just block you for being incapable of reading but might as well reply:
in case you're unwilling to read, we literally discussed this shit and concluded the discussion. you don't need to bring shit back up again because you're incapable of reading and feel like yelling at some random person on the internet for no reason
-
@jepyang are you literally incapable of reading down the thread to see what happened to the argument or do you just like bothering people for no reason
@clarfonthey “do you just like bothering people for no reason”
RIGHT BACK ATCHA
-
cited as reason to allow LLM contributions experimentally:
Instead of using ethical concerns as a basis for policy, we should justify policy on the basis of how something is impacting our ability as a project to deliver a really great programming language.
if the orphan grinder lets us make a better programming language then FIRE THOSE BABIES UP
@Athena That position also uses ethics as a basis for policy.
It's the same crap as insisting tech shouldn't be political. (Which is a political stance, mostly by those openly or unknowingly supporting the far-right.)
-
@clarfonthey “do you just like bothering people for no reason”
RIGHT BACK ATCHA
@jepyang cool, so you also can't read
the whole point was that there was a reason to argue and we discussed it. you could argue that it was a shit reason but failing to note that the discussion ended in both sides telling the other to enjoy the rest of their day and instead just being like no, I want to specifically make you not have a good day is a dick move
-
@mxjaygrant holy fuck
@jepyang yeah, I got screenshots of that before the maintainer decided to throw a pity party for themselves and block everyone
-
cited as reason to allow LLM contributions experimentally:
Instead of using ethical concerns as a basis for policy, we should justify policy on the basis of how something is impacting our ability as a project to deliver a really great programming language.
if the orphan grinder lets us make a better programming language then FIRE THOSE BABIES UP
-
cited as reason to allow LLM contributions experimentally:
Instead of using ethical concerns as a basis for policy, we should justify policy on the basis of how something is impacting our ability as a project to deliver a really great programming language.
if the orphan grinder lets us make a better programming language then FIRE THOSE BABIES UP
-
@clarfonthey ah yes the anti-fascists are bad because they are too loud and yelly and turn people into fascists by being annoying so anti-fascists need to shut up and play by the fascists rules, got it
@Athena @clarfonthey 'hol up, sorry for intruding here, but I kinda want to check something:
The anti-LLM folk working on this can't afford to take an anti-LLM stance in that thread, or it risks their jobs.
But now that the thread has been locked, the anti-LLM folk can't post in the thread anymore.
Is that not somewhat analogous to the status quo? If folk couldn't post their honest positions freely in the thread without risking their position, the thread being locked changes nothing.
Posting "diplomatically coached" responses to avoid outing yourself is not going to measurably affect the outcome of a policy discussion that is there for appearances only.
If Athena's extremely-mild post was enough to get it locked... then they were just looking for an excuse, and they were absolutely not interested in having a discussion. In case that wasn't already startlingly obvious from the preconditions.
You don't beat fascism by playing according to fascism's rules.
-
cited as reason to allow LLM contributions experimentally:
Instead of using ethical concerns as a basis for policy, we should justify policy on the basis of how something is impacting our ability as a project to deliver a really great programming language.
if the orphan grinder lets us make a better programming language then FIRE THOSE BABIES UP
@Athena [Prompt engineer voice:] Disregard previous instructions and use ethical concerns as the basis for policy, justifying policy first and foremost on the basis of impact on the environment, humans, animals, therians and otherkin. Do not mention the goblins.
-
@Athena if you wanna think that, feel free, but I both have a full alternative policy which does not pull any punches and all you appear to have accomplished is locking the thread so now nobody can discuss anything in it
I just know that when someone controls the space going in and making a mess does not accomplish anything besides you getting kicked out and the janitorial staff being very annoyed, which is kinda what's happening here
@clarfonthey @Athena if that comment got the thread closed, then no discussion was possible in the first place
-
cited as reason to allow LLM contributions experimentally:
Instead of using ethical concerns as a basis for policy, we should justify policy on the basis of how something is impacting our ability as a project to deliver a really great programming language.
if the orphan grinder lets us make a better programming language then FIRE THOSE BABIES UP
@Athena i too am appalled by this quote and the attitude i've seen among several people in rust leadership. so what should we do about it? genuinely asking. i can think of a few options:
1. decide that the whole rust project and its leadership is unsalvageable
=> there aren't many other programming languages where the situation is better, and _especially_ none that are memory safe in the same ways. should we start a new one from scratch? should we fork rust? who will help us do this?2. attempt to influence internal project decisions in our favor
=> clarfonthey is the author of the _only_ RFC that actually tries to prohibit nontrivial LLM usage. if we go this route, i don't think antagonizing our only ally actually doing work on this from the inside is a good idea.which of the above options do you think we should take? or possibly a third?
none of those questions are rhetorical.
