The Zig project's rationale for their firm anti-AI contribution policy

(simonwillison.net)

35 points | by lumpa 2 hours ago ago

4 comments

  • jart 29 minutes ago

    > This makes a lot of sense to me. It relates to an idea I've seen circulating elsewhere: if a PR was mostly written by an LLM, why should a project maintainer spend time reviewing and discussing that PR as opposed to firing up their own LLM to solve the same problem?

    The same argument applies to open source itself. Why use someone's project when you can just have the robot write your own? It's especially true if the open source project was vibe coded. AI and technology in general makes personalization cheap and affordable. Whereas earlier you had to use something that was mass produced to be satisfactory for everyone, now you have the hope of getting something that's outstanding for just you. It also stimulates the labor economy, because you have lots of people everywhere reinventing open source projects with their LLMs.

    • gausswho 6 minutes ago

      That only holds true for the smallest tier of open source projects. Past a certain point of complexity, it's unlikely you can expect the robot to read your mind well enough to provide something of high quality and 'outstanding for just you'.

      The Zig project is certainly far beyond such capability.

  • jwzxgo 2 hours ago

    I talked to developers of https://deerflow.tech/ and they pretty much had the same plan, unless it's coming from a known and trusted developer.

  • feverzsj 17 minutes ago

    No human should trust any bullshit made by bullshit machine.