1. Forum
  2. FidoNet
  3. linux.debian.user

  • Re: debian-user Question about: Debian puts artificial intelligence to

    From Charles Curley@3:633/10 to All on Friday, August 21, 2026 22:50:01
    Subject: Re: debian-user Question about: Debian puts artificial intelligence to a vote; developers will decide how to accept AI-generated or assisted code

    On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 19:16:59 +0000
    fxkl47BF@protonmail.com wrote:

    it wasn't my intent to ruffle anybody's feathers

    Understood.

    only that i am concerned about what my computer is doing that i
    didn't consent to

    In that case, I suggest you be less concerned with AI per se and more
    with malware, whether produced by artificial intelligence or the natural
    kind.

    Tools are amplifiers. Throughout history most tools have amplified
    muscles: the block and tackle, the hammer, the screwdriver, etc. Some
    tools amplify the mind: writing, the computer, and now AI. Any tool can
    be used for good or ill. I suggest one should be concerned with malice
    and not with tools used with malice.

    --
    Does anybody read signatures any more?

    https://charlescurley.com
    https://charlescurley.com/blog/

    --- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
    * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)
  • From Charles Curley@3:633/10 to All on Saturday, August 22, 2026 17:00:01
    Subject: Re: debian-user Question about: Debian puts artificial intelligence to a vote; developers will decide how to accept AI-generated or assisted code

    On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 15:08:38 +0100
    Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:

    AI as
    used in Open Source products may indeed produce just source code which
    could theoretically be audited, but inevitably, it would be audited by another AI. We all know how many humans could be bothered to audit the comparatively tiny chunk of extremely critical code which contained
    the Heartbleed bug.

    I agree that AI expands the scope for bloat, and so for malware. I
    still think that the problem here is malware, regardless of whether it
    was produced by AI or natural intelligence (NI). And it is possible to
    write code that detects malware with no AI element to it.

    AI is indeed a tool, but it is a tool which you pick up without
    knowing either who manufactured it or what it is capable of doing in
    addition to what you expect.

    No disagreement so far. I simply add that the human being who entered
    the prompt into the AI is responsible for the resulting code. If there's malware in it, that human being is responsible.

    --
    Does anybody read signatures any more?

    https://charlescurley.com
    https://charlescurley.com/blog/

    --- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
    * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)