Re: [PATCH 2/2] docs: define policy forbidding use of "AI" / LLM code generators

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 06:29:38PM +0100, Michal Suchánek wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 12:06:59PM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 04:29:52PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > > This document targets all contributors. Contributions can be typo
> > > fix, translations, ... and don't have to be technical. Similarly,
> > > contributors aren't expected to be technical experts. As a neophyte,
> > > "AI" makes sense. "Idempotent code generator" or "LLM" don't :)
> > 
> > I don't think there's any big deal in using AI for typo fixes.
> 
> For how many typos it is still OK, and would not a deterministic
> spellchecker be preferred?
> 
> There are some edge cases where using AI is OK, the problem is most of
> the time it is not clear it is OK to use.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Michal

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I am not a lawyer, and I don't speak for Red Hat.


My point is however that e.g. even if you are using e.g. a grammar
corrector you better make sure that it is not claiming that its output
is a derivative work.

-- 
MST