73
No, KDE isn't turning into an AI desktop (tilvids.com)
submitted 4 days ago by to c/linux@programming.dev
50 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Timestamps:

00:00 Intro

00:36 Sponsor: TuxCare

01:46 KDE's AI policy

06:42 Existing AI policies

10:06 Going further on AI

12:58 My stance on AI

17:05 FOSS projects: yes or no to AI?

28:02 Sponsor: Tuxedo Computer

all 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 78 points 3 days ago (42 children)

I'm not watching a 30 minute video to find out something that would take a few paragraphs to write...

I don't think people are worried about AI on the desktop, they are worried about AI in the development's process, because it introduces technical debt and dependence on fascist companies.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 42 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 days ago (32 children)

    The KDE AI policy is pretty explicit about AI code contributions should have the same quality level as non-AI. So the tech debt concern is a nothing.

    And there is no dependency risk, you can trivially switch from Claude to opencode w/ self hosted models, the AI companies have literally no moat to lock developers in. Its also entirely optional to use AI.

    Environmental concerns are valid, but tech debt and dependency are silly arguments.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 32 child comments
    •
  • [–] 35 points 3 days ago (28 children)

    I'm not talking about vendor lock-in, I'm talking about a system that has destroyed the training path for juniors, and the fact that as developers lean on AI more their skills atrophy and they become dependent on that workflow (regardless of provider), and their ability to introspect a code base decreases because they had less time learning it during the build-out phase.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 days ago* (7 children)

    This was an issue in the computer science field well before LLMs, though (like in many areas) they did pour gas on the fire.

    TBH I think it’s more of an issue for paid software. Manpower and burnout is the bottleneck for FOSS projects, and contributions are largely thankless, hence I think amongst the people who do contribute, there will be more of an interest in truly learning the codebase.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 3 days ago (6 children)

    Multiple FOSS projects have been complaining over the last year or so that they are getting swamped with LLM-generate PRs that are often low-quality, but still require a similar amount of time to review. LLMs are shifting extremely lited FOSS core maintainer capacity away from development and into time-wasting code reviews with a high rejection rate.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago* (5 children)

    Well, yes, and that’s exactly what the KDE policy is addressing. They’re saying “we are going to reject vibecoded PRs, unconditionally; so don’t bother submitting them.”

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 days ago (4 children)

    The biggest contributor to the backlash of the proposed policy was the additional aspect explicitly not requiring AI used in a PR to be disclosed, regardless of its quality (and which is unrelated to the ability to quickly reject obvious slop PRs).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (3 children)

    There was some discussion on that still. Some people wanted to avoid having AI companies basically get free advertisements in PRs.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago* (2 children)

    Personally I thought that was a nonsensical argument from them, as they could've just put in the policy to declare that AI was used, but just not mention the specific one. Better yet, IMO, would've been to ban all non-self hosted AI use, which basically cuts out all the corporate AI's.

    Though even with the self hosted models available, the ethical and copyright risk remains, so I'd still have personally opted for a total ban.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    Well that was also discussed, the person who suggested not having an AI disclosure was against it being used for advertising, but was also open to having a general one that didn't allow the company/model. Not sure that discussion has concluded yet btw.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago

    The other devs were generally against any form of disclosure, saying that they didn't want to 'shame' developers who used it.

    The discussion was locked and then removed from public view due to public backlash.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago (10 children)

    You can be mad about that, but it has nothing to do with KDE.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 3 days ago*

    Except that the KDE contributors would be directly supporting it financially and giving it training data.

    Also directly financially supporting technofascists and oligarchs.

    Also directly financially supporting the destruction of the environment, stealing of water and electricity from the poor, bribary of politicians both local and international, and destruction of communities.

    LLMs run by corporations are terrible and toxic, with very few exceptions. We also can't have a good faith argument and not acknowledge that the overwhelming majority of devs use those corporate datacenter models and not locally run models powered by home/company solar panels.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 3 days ago (8 children)

    Sure, it's an everywhere problem. But it would be nice to see more projects having strong preventative policies.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [+] -7 points 3 days ago (7 children)

    I think it is more important to leave people the freedom to decide for themselves. It's not an opensource project's place to tell its contributers how to work as long as the contribution fits their requirements. No one's opinion is worth more than the other one's.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago (6 children)

    "Individual freedom" as a primary driver over the last decades/centuries is what's got the USA into the state it's in now. I'd rather focus on something that contributes to the collective good.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago (5 children)

    Telling other people what to do is also a major conflict driver.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 days ago (4 children)

    Sure can be. But it's also a vital part of how any society works - it's what laws are for (making no claims about the efficacy of current legal systems here), and it's how you keep power in check. Libertarianism doesn't work.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago (3 children)

    There is no law that prohibits AI use. Telling people what to do also does not work it is usually met with resistance.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    I mean laws in a general sense.. Like, you know, it's illegal to murder or whatever. That is a form of "telling people what (not) to do".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • load more comments (9 replies)
  • [–] 7 points 3 days ago (2 children)

    Sounds like a PR nightmare of AI tech debt to me. You're participating in the Shareen effect of the AI slop world.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (7 children)

    This is a human who made a video with no AI voice, talked through it, presents multiple viewpoints, and your reductionist response is "could've been a few paragraphs". Either you're unwilling to understand complexity or unable or both.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 18 points 3 days ago (3 children)

    Any video that only shows someone's talking head should have been a blogpost, otherwise it's a terrible waste of resources.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 day ago

    Any blog post could have been a folk song, but I'm not going to pretend that you made a comment instead of didy makes you a worse person.

    People take in information in different ways and can have preferences for different formats.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 3 days ago (2 children)

    This guys is a just a click whore who put sponso everywhere and can't even present news without giving hus shitty opinion

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 2 points 2 days ago

    The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 14 points 3 days ago* (4 children)

    The two camps of AI evangelists and AI haters are really tiring. Neither seems to be able to accept nuance. Luckily the world isn't bifurcated and there is are many opinions and stances on between above and all around.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] -10 points 3 days ago (2 children)

    The same thing occurs whenever Israel or Russia are mentioned.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    There is a time for nuance, but there are also times when one side is simply evil. Giving them the benefit of the doubt only supports their pushed narrative and enables them to continue doing what they're doing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)

    KDE 4 life.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •