On 9/5/26 17:29, Ian Eure wrote:
Hi Thanos,
I highly doubt Guix does not already have drive-by contributions where
LLMs were used.
Not from me (I did check thoroughly after I learned this was so
controversial).
There are two issues:
- Should Guix allow contributions including LLM output?
- Should Guix label software it packages as containing LLM output?
This conversation is about the latter, but people keep bringing in
discussion about the former. They are different problems which require
different discussion, and different solutions.
I agree these are separate.
The problem is that "labeling packages containing LLM output"-problem is
dependent on resolving "including LLM output in Guix"-problem.
Because what would be the point of labeling if Guix itself can include
LLM output? Technically nothing, we would just label the `guix`
package. But in practice, who would both use Guix and filter out the
LLM-flagged packages, when that would mean filtering out Guix?
Therefore, discussing the labeling-problem presupposes that the
LLM-output-in-Guix-problem will be settled in the "no" direction. At
least, I interpreted Untrusem's opening message in that way.
So even though these are different problems, with different solutions,
it is natural that the problems become entangled if we try to solve them
in that order.
Hugo
