Dear Moritz and Julian, thanks a lot to both of you for getting together, discussing, and ultimately crafting this statement. It matches my own views to a large extent.
All the best, Wolfgang Am Di 28.07.2026 17:14 schrieb Moritz Angermann via ghc-devs: > Dear friends, > > I've spent the last two days discussing the topic of LLM contributions > in detail with Julian at length over video. As the discussion over > the last few weeks have shown that it's very hard to find agreement on > a common policy, we have tried to outline what we consider a statement > that covers at least both of our views. With Julian and I > representing a fairly wide spectrum of the positions, we hope that > this may provide a statement that many can subscribe to. > > We have tried to keep it short, and not get distracted by specificies > of workflows, quality standards, and definitions of terms, which seem > to distract from the core that we want to address. > > Respectfully, > Julian and Moritz > > > ## A shared statement on our environment in the face of LLMs > > As human-LLM interaction is becoming more common, we find ourselves > debating not only our technical goals, but also our understanding of > open source community and values. > > This is why we all agree that we want to participate in an environment... > > 1. that inspires the exchange of technical ideas and knowledge between humans > 2. that is supportive and accessible to the point that no one should > feel the need to use LLM in the first place > 3. that facilitates building trust relationships with one another > 4. that rewards technical excellence and authenticity > 5. that demands all interactions to be genuine and respectful > > We recognize that using LLMs responsibly is challenging. Not only can > they be used for abuse[^1][^2], but they may also cause the quality of > communication and intellectual engagement to decline[^3]. > > There is an emerging body of scientific literature supporting these > concerns about negative effects on psychological, cognitive, > real-world performance, etc. We recommend everyone to familiarize > themselves with the current state of research. Here are a few links > for your consideration. > > * [How AI Impacts Skill Formation](https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.20245) > * [AI Assistance Reduces Persistence and Hurts Independent > Performance](https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.04721) > * [From Future of Work to Future of Workers: Addressing Asymptomatic > AI Harms for Dignified Human-AI > Interaction](https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.21920) > * [AI Competency Erosion: Understanding Expertise > Decay](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-032-11748-9_5) > * [Your Brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of Cognitive Debt when Using an > AI Assistant for Essay Writing Task](https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.08872) > * [Investigating the Effects of LLM Use on Critical Thinking Under > Time Constraints: Access Timing and Time > Availability](https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.08849) > > _(This list does not claim to be comprehensive; it is merely meant to > provide you with an initial stepping stone into the current > research)._ > > Moreover we are especially concerned about their potential negative > effects on open source communities[^4], human communication and > collaboration. > > We strive to be an inclusive community and judge contributions on > their merits. This includes the use of LLMs as long as it does not > disturb our envisioned environment outlined earlier. > > We recognize that there are users and contributors of this project who > would rather not interact with LLM generated content at all. To > balance the preferences and self-determination of the diverse group of > contributors, we require that the use of LLMs to generate content is > clearly attributed as such, failure to do so may result in > contributions to be rejected. We understand that this may not be > satisfactory to everyone, since we cannot completely avoid exposure to > LLM generated content. However, we will neither compromise our quality > standards, nor allow any disruption of human-human interaction by the > use of technology. > > Examples of inappropriate use are: > > - feeding someone's email into an LLM to generate an answer > - creating automated LLMs written bug reports that a volunteer has to > work through to determine if it has any value at all > - generating large patches that take more time to review by the > project than it took you to create > > We want this to be a project of human interaction, of shared curiosity > and a beacon of engineering excellence. > > These are the shared values we stand by today as a project, and they > may evolve along with our shared experiences and emerging scientific > evidence over time. > > > Julian Ospald > Moritz Angermann > > -- > [^1]: https://openai.com/index/disrupting-malicious-ai-uses/ > [^2]: https://www.infoq.com/news/2026/02/ai-floods-close-projects/ > [^3]: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.06166 > [^4]: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.15494 _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
