In the news topic, interesting comments and questions were brought up that just had to make me post something like this. Starting with this post (by SGS, post:3077, topic:1274):
A while back I learned after watching the show “Switched to Linux”,
It made me wonder about a few things about Chaotic-AUR since there are now new upgrades done as mentioned here:
Copywrites, quality, and ethics are the reason why Gentoo bans AI according to the arguments listed above. My question is, does the Chaotic-AUR system follow the same guidelines (or at the very least something similar)?
By looking at various topics of discussion on this forum portraying to the use of AI. It would appear (at least at face value) that the use of AI tends to be less favorable to the users of this operating system. I guess my question is, is there any checks and balances put in place to keep the copy write infringements out, and the quality of what is offered on that server high?
I don’t actually know what goes on in the background of development into such a project. I ask because I don’t really know.
I guess I should have made myself more clear, sorry for that…the packages that are available on Chaotic AUR, is there software updates and programs in there that are made by AI in some form or another which sparks the controversy that Gentoo won’t play into?
When I saw the update annonucement, and AI discussions, I somehow got it into my mind to ask about the conents available to the public.
Ya was aware that announcement had nothing to do with it. I should have clarified that better, I’m sorry for that. I was on a different thought train and should have mentioned that better
Thank you for clearing it up for me, it makes more sense
You are overthinking the second statement. Just rewatch the video you posted.
This implies that when they are buiding something specifically for gentoo, say a settings app. All that code will have to be written by them and not the AI. However, say there was a bug on the settings app and someone used something like devin and pushed upstream, they won’t mind — in that as long as its not obviously AI or poorly written it might get updated.
If I understand what you mean by packages in Chaotic-aur, let me give you this example. If an app is in apple store or android app store, there is no way to tell if the app was made by AI or not unless the code for that app is open source or has mentioned its use of AI.
There is also no way of verifying something like that easily, it would be practically impossible. A majority of apps on chaotic-aur are open source and you can look at the code and follow up on each of their practices.
The Chaotic team doesn’t develop or maintain the applications in the repo, they are compiling PKGBUILDs from the Arch User Repository. I think it is safe to say there is no way of telling if user-submitted packages in the AUR have been made by AI or not. Probably some of them have been.
I didn’t watch the video, but I am sure the Gentoo team have taken this stance in response to something that is happening (which is distinctly different from just saying “AI is bad and no one should use it”). Probably they were getting a lot of AI-generated code contributions that were sloppy or broken, and it was a chore to deal with it. Perhaps not getting these contributions at all is better than trying to go through all the bad code and fix it.
The Garuda and Chaotic projects don’t currently have this specific issue with people submitting a lot of badly-written code, but if they did I am sure the team would consider if establishing a similar policy would help take the curse off a bit.
I don’t think anyone currently involved with Garuda is a big supporter of AI Involvement with the project. That could change in the future I guess, but for now no one here is looking to have an AI steering the bus.
