On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 11:38:27AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Daniel P. Berrangé: > > > In practical terms, how can a contributor do due-diligence on the > > output of an AI generator ? The vast size of training material makes > > it hard, if not impossible validate the license & copyright > > compliance of non-trivial code. Some tools claim to validate their > > output for compliance in some manner, but what that actually means > > is hard to find out & the reliablity of such claims is unclear. > > The same way they already do for other contributions? > > Even without AI, they could have been lifted off places like > Stackoverflow, without proper attribution. This isn't a new problem. > What has changed is that you can go to a web site and solicited > potentially problematic contributions. It has changed from a clear concious decision to copy content, to an impossible to diagnose side effect of using the tools. IMHO that is materially different, because the former is only a problem for the small subset of untrustworthy developers who deliberately ignore their obligations, while the latter problem can unwittingly affect any developer who uses the tools no matter how diligen tthey are. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
