<!DOCTYPE html>
<html data-lt-installed="true">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body style="padding-bottom: 1px;">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 15/05/2025 23:57, Konstantin
Kharlamov wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:d7af569849596a6f47fce6a503e62ec64e46b17d.camel@yandex.ru">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">On Thu, 2025-05-15 at 16:09 +0200, Felix Ernst wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
Late reply, but I also wanted to mention that I am 100% in support of
any anit-AI messaging and policies we might choose.
The wording as linked by Akseli in their first post seems like a good
starting point in that regard:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">Other projects have already done something similar, see for
example:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://discourse.gnome.org/t/loupe-no-longer-allows-generative-ai-contributions/27327">https://discourse.gnome.org/t/loupe-no-longer-allows-generative-ai-contributions/27327</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
The only use of AI I support needs all its training data to be
licenced in a way that allows use for the AI training e.g. CC0 or
WTFPL licence. This way I don't see ethical issues because the
copyright holders have then given some sort of consenst for this use.
I wouldn't even mind if we went one step further and actively
promoted e.g. Plasma as "free of AI". This does not need to be fully
true, but this would be more of an activism and marketing angle I
would like to see. There is a good chance though that this would not
be a good use of our time but it would align with KDE Eco IMO. (I
know that there are also great uses of AI, but public messaging needs
to be clear and easy to understand, and there is still enough pro-AI
marketing out there to the point that taking the opposite stance
seems sensible to me.)
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
I'm not sure taking fully opposite stance would be beneficial for
anyone. Pro-AI has a point. And most anti-AI people from my experience
are actually anti-unlicensed-AI, i.e. not anti-AI in general. That's
because full "anti-AI" has no benefits, so there's not much people, who
actually are fully anti-AI. Hence, making public stance "we're all
anti-AI" would be harmful, not only in marketing sense, but also
technologically, because it would require all KDE apps maintainers to
remove support for AI tools (think of Kate completion plugins for
example), which sounds like a nice way to introduce conflict in the
community.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Ethical issues aside, AI has other impacts as well, most notably
environmental via the huge amounts of energy required to first train
AI and then even using it.<br>
</body>
<lt-container></lt-container>
</html>