this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2026
140 points (97.3% liked)
Open Source
49640 readers
173 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
- !libre_culture@lemmy.ml
- !libre_software@lemmy.ml
- !libre_hardware@lemmy.ml
- !linux@lemmy.ml
- !technology@lemmy.ml
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Disclosure. If LLMs are used in service of open-source projects, then they are relevant, but clearly many in the community feel that to be negative, and therefore there should be a disclosure. Someone can make open source software using closed-source tooling already, so disallowing one form of tooling entirely is letting a moral reaction interfere with how we understand open source.
Linux would have to be removed from discussion, for example, if all LLM-contributed projects were to be disallowed. I don't see why rules should be made with explicit exceptions in mind, yet excluding Linux cuts out a huge portion of open source discussion.
I'm mostly referring to these new projects that are AI coded from scratch, not existing projects that might have some LLM contributions.
In my view, starting code from scratch or augmenting existing code with LLMs are equivalent in terms of whether or not they should be eligible for discussion. Both should have a disclosure, and both are worthy of discussing where relevant. If someone uses a bot to advertise a million LLM-started projects or something and overwhelm the community, then this is bad and should be stopped, I suppose.