Hi Hugo, On Thu, 16 Jul 2026 at 21:56, Hugo Buddelmeijer via "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Second, I did (and still) do feel that it is possible to use tools like >>> LLMs without harming conviviality; even enhancing it. >> >> For what my opinion is worth, I don’t think LLMs might be a convivial >> technology, never. > > I didn't mean to start this whole LLM discussion again. Me neither, as the whole LLM discussion about its usefulness. However, it appears to me important to clarify that by design LLM isn’t “convivial“ by Illich definition. Not being “convivial” by Illich definition does not imply it’s useless for Guix as a whole – and today most of us agree about some consensus; no need to rehash, indeed. :-) Although “convivial” by Illich definition appears to me inspirational, it’s not the alpha and omega neither the only one compass or framework. > The point of the message was that in practice it doesn't matter much > whether LLMs can in theory be used in accordance to our ethics, because > in a correctly functioning convivial system there wouldn't be a real > need for them. I agree with you about thinking about our “ethics”. Being “convivial“ appears to me one good food for thought in order to sketch: Why do we build Guix all together? There is no definitive answer. And potentially many different angles. >From my point of view, it’s important to individually re-think time to time and estimate how aligned the trajectory draws. I’m happy if “conviviality” speaks to you, great! Yeah “conviviality” speaks to me too. ;-) > Nevertheless I'm feeling positive, because I believe we have a very good > technological and social basis for making conviviality work again. Yeah, I’m convinced too! :-) Cheers, simon
