Hello there, Le mercredi, 12 août 2026, 17.12:43 h heure d’été d’Europe centrale Holger Levsen a écrit : > ---- start ballot proposal ---- > > title: LLM usage accellerates the destruction of our ecosystem (planet > earth) and that is a deal-breaker > > > > Using its power under Constitution section 4.1(5), the Project issues the > following statement describing its current position regarding the use of LLM > (Large Language Models) within Debian. > > We don't have a concern with the LLM _technology_ as such: it's just maths > and enough training material, which outputs a very large set of numbers > that we can use to infer new material from existing material. But we cannot > talk about the LLM technology without talking about who is pushing for its > usage, who is doing the training and how, what effect those have on our > limited resources, and what are the economical and political motives of > these. > > Foremost we don't understand how anyone can agree that global LLM usage > accellerates the destruction of our ecosystem, planet earth, and not feel > like that is a deal-breaker. > > To often the only response we've seen to this point was that other > activities are also bad (some even worse) for the climate. How is this even > an argument? The planet is burning, we should try to stop that as much and > as fast as we can! If others aren't stopping, isn't that even more reason > to compensate for their irresponsible actions? > > And while we're on that point: All of our users live on this planet, so > protecting this planet is a matter of life and death for all of us. In other > words, caring about something as big as climate change during our Debian > work is self evident. > > Debian recognizes that LLM *also* raise significant ethical, legal, > technical, and social concerns. These include questions relating to > copyright and licensing, privacy, the provenance and quality of generated > material, the health of Free Software communities, and the long-term > consequences of widespread reliance on LLM-generated content. > > That said, we would like to emphasize that we condemn LLM (resource) usage > but not LLM users. Fight the game, but not the players. > > We also acknowledge that LLM usage can be hard if not impossible to detect > and that Debian as a distribution cannot really impose LLM policies on > other projects we package and distribute. Therefore this text is just a > position statement. This said however, we appreciate the disclosure of LLM > usage. > > Accordingly, Debian encourages contributors to avoid the use of LLM where > practical and to prefer human authorship, collaboration, and technical > understanding over LLM-generated output. > > At the same time, Debian has long relied on the judgment and responsibility > of its contributors rather than prescribing individual workflows. > Contributors remain responsible for everything they submit, irrespective of > the tools used in preparing a contribution. Existing Debian standards > regarding quality, correctness, licensing, and legal compliance continue to > apply. > > The Debian project has always recognized the commitment and professionalism > of its members. All contributions are under the responsibility of the > Debian Contributor making it, no matter the technology they have behind. We > trust all Debian Developers, Maintainers and Contributors will continue to > uphold the high quality values that have distinguished our project from its > onset. > > Please keep being excellent to each other and the only planet we have. > > > > ---- end ballot proposal ----
Seconded. > with thanks to Didier 'OdyX' Raboud for > https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2026/08/msg00101.html and Bas Wijnen > for https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2026/08/msg00118.html and Tobias > Frost for https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2026/07/msg00343.html Eh, I'm glad it helped someone draft a new ballot option! Best, OdyX
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
