LLM Policies: Progress At All Costs

Mention is being made of the consideration of Large Language Model (LLM) policies by both GNOME and KDE. The shift began with KDE's provocative draft, which resulted in a heated debate, subsequent bans, and a wave of resignations. GNOME, on the other hand, has not yet proposed an official stance but has teams in place with their own stringent policies.

There is also an informal proposal to ban all LLM contributions to GNOME projects and infrastructure. These discussions are not merely nitpicking workflows, but rather, their core is the very purpose of Free and Open Source Software (FLOSS) projects.

Two contrasting perspectives exist regarding the purpose of FLOSS. One is collectivism, which implies that FLOSS is primarily about collaborative work, enjoying the journey, and the bonds formed through big goals. The emphasis is on the community and shared experiences, with software being a bonus. The other viewpoint is completionism, viewing FLOSS as a product focused on continuous improvement and advancement. Fun is seen as individually solving technical problems and not fostering social bonds.

LLMs have tilted the scales towards the completionist viewpoint. With an LLM capable of achieving 80% of the goal, there's no necessity to invest time in mentoring, discussion, or convincing others. This shift is fueled by the belief that an expert can easily fill in the remaining 20%. However, this perspective commodifies the human element, reducing colleagues to interchangeable units in a race for 100% completion of software projects.

This 'progress at all costs' mindset could lead to a degradation of the community spirit that has historically defined FLOSS.