cm0002@infosec.pub to Linux@programming.dev · 17 days agoLinux kernel devs drop obligatory confession of AI tool usagewww.theregister.comexternal-linkmessage-square45linkfedilinkarrow-up1147arrow-down11
arrow-up1146arrow-down1external-linkLinux kernel devs drop obligatory confession of AI tool usagewww.theregister.comcm0002@infosec.pub to Linux@programming.dev · 17 days agomessage-square45linkfedilink
minus-squarerefalo@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up15·17 days agoFreeBSD and OpenBSD both allow AI and contain AI-generated code. NetBSD requires prior approval but doesn’t outright ban it.
minus-squarerozodru@piefed.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·15 days agoOpenBSD doesn’t allow it, what are you on about? https://lwn.net/Articles/1064541/ Thomas de Grivel made clear the chances of accepting code with such a murky copyright situation were effectively nil, and he said on March 23 that he would remove all the LLM-generated code and keep only what he wrote himself.
minus-squarerefalo@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·15 days agoopen-slopware calls OpenBSD having a “Permissive AI Policy” and links to this commit as evidence.
FreeBSD and OpenBSD both allow AI and contain AI-generated code. NetBSD requires prior approval but doesn’t outright ban it.
OpenBSD doesn’t allow it, what are you on about?
https://lwn.net/Articles/1064541/
Thomas de Grivel made clear the chances of accepting code with such a murky copyright situation were effectively nil, and he said on March 23 that he would remove all the LLM-generated code and keep only what he wrote himself.
open-slopware calls OpenBSD having a “Permissive AI Policy” and links to this commit as evidence.