- cross-posted to:
- linux@programming.dev
- cross-posted to:
- linux@programming.dev
You must log in or register to comment.
I guess you could frame a neutral stance that way as it doesn’t ban AI.
But to me “pro AI” sounds like embracing it, building it into processes, …
Yeah, the headlines is editorialized.
“Neutral” is right if you read the proposals: https://www.debian.org/vote/2026/vote_002#quorum
Not sure if there’s any point in saying this, but the fact that the technology has notable companies pushing it forward that are often associated with fascism does not mean that the technology itself is somehow inextricably linked to fascism, just like how Microsoft making an operating system doesn’t associate operating systems in general with Microsoft or their goals. The GR was concerned with the technology as a whole AFAICT, not the companies developing some variants of it.
I like this reply.
LLM in the open source world seem to be seen as evil things but the tech doesn’t have to be trained on copyrighted material and doesn’t have to be run by evil companies.
I don’t like the anti sentiment which Codeberg also seems to share… there is nothing bad with LLMs themselves, just with implementations of them.
Celebrating anti-AI is like fighting the Internet in the early 2000s or steam machines in the industrial age… Of course some companies are doing bad things like always but the technology makes our lives easier
Okay so where are the good LLMs managed by good organizations and practical for programmers?
On your local machine, after having fed your ops DBs and codebases into it?
There would be nothing bad with LLMs provided that:
They weren’t based on colossal scale appropriation of people’s copyrighted work - are there any like that? The companies are actually laundering their IP addresses so that they can’t be blocked (see recent article on the LKML for an example). I don’t call that “fair use”.
They weren’t being powered by building new fossil-fuel generators in the middle of heatwaves that make it very clear that the climate emergency is here and now (the idea that LLMs are going to solve that problem for us is laughable).
I could go on. Nothing bad, so long as we ignore all the bad parts.
The closest to what you want is probably the Nvidia Nemotron series, which uses an open dataset. It used a sizable GPU cluster to train, but nothing on the scale of what OpenAI/Anthropic are guzzling. That, and Nvidia makes a point to advertise high utilization/efficiency.
There are smaller scale truly open LLMs like the Olmo series, but Nemotron is the most practical to use.
Then there are the Chinese “open weights” LLMs, which tend to be trained on more modest Huawei ASICs instead of GPUs, and probably with a good chunk of renewables. The dataset is closed, and who knows what is in there, but at least the training scale is much smaller
They are Apache licensed.
Another thing is that both these group pitch LLMs as modular tools to customize, not magic black boxes to rent.
Celebrating anti-AI is like fighting […] steam machines in the industrial age…
So what you’re saying that anti-AI is like fighting the machines that have made the planet uninhabitable in under two centuries of use, thus being responsible for billions of deaths and the collapse of this wave of civilization?
huh.
