<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>LLM on cperrin.xyz</title><link>https://cperrin.xyz/en/tags/llm/</link><description>Recent content in LLM on cperrin.xyz</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2026 23:07:43 +0200</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://cperrin.xyz/en/tags/llm/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>What can we do about the vibe committer</title><link>https://cperrin.xyz/en/2026/06/19/what-can-we-do-about-the-vibe-committer/</link><pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://cperrin.xyz/en/2026/06/19/what-can-we-do-about-the-vibe-committer/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;I recently had a discussion on Mastodon that was sparked by a post of the Software Freedom Conservancy about the &lt;a href="https://sfconservancy.org/llm-gen-ai/llm-backed-generative-ai-recommendations.html"&gt;handling of LLM-gen-AI submissions&lt;/a&gt;. There are many people who are very opposed to letting LLM-generated code into their projects. This is an understandable standpoint given concerns like legality, unethical sourcing, resource usage, and concentration of power.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Apart from that, it is completely reasonable for a maintainer to set rules for submissions. A FOSS license doesn&amp;rsquo;t mean that a maintainer even has to interact with anyone. It just provides the source.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>