#NetBSD joins the ranks of software projects that ban #AI generated code.
How they are going to enforce such ban is an obvious question lingering in the air.
Does it include only cases like “hey #ChatGPT write a suite of unit tests for this class”? Or also cases where #Copilot simply autocompletes a for loop while I’m typing it?
In the latter case, how would a hypothetical reviewer enforce the ban? How would the for loop autocompleted by Copilot, or the boilerplate population of hashmap values, look any different than one I would write myself?
And if the issue is with any code that isn’t directly written by a human, then why stop at modern AI generation? Why not include LINTers and traditional IDE autocomplete features?
I have no doubt that the projects that are announcing these no-AI policies have good intentions, but it’s probably time for all of us to have an honest talk.
Code completion isn’t a clear cut binary feature. It’s a big spectrum that goes from the old exuberant ctags to ChatGPT writing whole classes.
And code completion shouldn’t be banned. If it makes a developer more productive, and if the developer understands the code that is being completed, then such bans are akin to a “drivers should only use cars with manual transmission because we feel that it’s more manly”. It’s a conservative and elitist act of shunning out new productive tools because we can’t understand them and regulate them properly.
And more people need to call out the bluff: in cases where the AI only completes a few lines of code, its basically impossible to tell if that snippet was written by a human or an AI assistant.
https://tech.slashdot.org/story/24/05/17/007240/netbsd-bans-ai-generated-code?utm_source=rss1.0mainlinkanon&utm_medium=feed
Fabio Manganiello /
npub1s9…jdnmu
2024-05-17 08:41:59
Author Public Key
npub1s9uc08n58mxqk5umvapqulwzng0sja635q86r36d8n4rr9r9ygaskjdnmuPublished at
2024-05-17 08:41:59Event JSON
{
"id": "e1a1f58c6ef51f9d4d81fecaadcba76d15940b03956b8e1292b3ae3af281678f",
"pubkey": "8179879e743ecc0b539b67420e7dc29a1f097751a00fa1c74d3cea319465223b",
"created_at": 1715935319,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"t",
"netbsd"
],
[
"t",
"chatgpt"
],
[
"t",
"copilot"
],
[
"t",
"ai"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://manganiello.social/objects/a29ab0fb-04b3-4383-827f-ed7402b9e62a",
"activitypub"
],
[
"L",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"l",
"pink.momostr.activitypub:https://manganiello.social/objects/a29ab0fb-04b3-4383-827f-ed7402b9e62a",
"pink.momostr"
]
],
"content": "#NetBSD joins the ranks of software projects that ban #AI generated code.\n\nHow they are going to enforce such ban is an obvious question lingering in the air.\n\nDoes it include only cases like “hey #ChatGPT write a suite of unit tests for this class”? Or also cases where #Copilot simply autocompletes a for loop while I’m typing it?\n\nIn the latter case, how would a hypothetical reviewer enforce the ban? How would the for loop autocompleted by Copilot, or the boilerplate population of hashmap values, look any different than one I would write myself?\n\nAnd if the issue is with any code that isn’t directly written by a human, then why stop at modern AI generation? Why not include LINTers and traditional IDE autocomplete features?\n\nI have no doubt that the projects that are announcing these no-AI policies have good intentions, but it’s probably time for all of us to have an honest talk.\n\nCode completion isn’t a clear cut binary feature. It’s a big spectrum that goes from the old exuberant ctags to ChatGPT writing whole classes.\n\nAnd code completion shouldn’t be banned. If it makes a developer more productive, and if the developer understands the code that is being completed, then such bans are akin to a “drivers should only use cars with manual transmission because we feel that it’s more manly”. It’s a conservative and elitist act of shunning out new productive tools because we can’t understand them and regulate them properly.\n\nAnd more people need to call out the bluff: in cases where the AI only completes a few lines of code, its basically impossible to tell if that snippet was written by a human or an AI assistant.\n\nhttps://tech.slashdot.org/story/24/05/17/007240/netbsd-bans-ai-generated-code?utm_source=rss1.0mainlinkanon\u0026utm_medium=feed",
"sig": "735129b0b6368255f13cd492a6f5e8a0248352a2a437fa5e28546bebf89eb8c0f3b905664fe603c3edbc96df1b480e0e79057d34c1bfa0ecca5c4d36dcf317b9"
}