Post #2049504

2026-04-15 20:22 UTC

👀 … https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2026/apr/15/eternal-november-generative-ai-llm/ …my colleague Denver Gingerich writes: newcomers&#39; extensive reliance on LLM-backed generative AI is comparable to the Eternal September onslaught to USENET in 1993. I was on USENET extensively then; I confirm the disruption was indeed similar. I urge you to read his essay, think about it, &amp; join Denver, me, &amp; others at the following datetimes… $ date -d &#39;2026-04-21 15:00 UTC&#39; $ date -d &#39;2026-04-28 23:00 UTC&#39; …in https://bbb-new.sfconservancy.org/rooms/welcome-llm-gen-ai-users-to-foss/join #AI #LLM #OpenSource

Replies (2)

@sjn@chaos.social 2026-04-15 21:18

@bkuhn@fedi.copyleft.org ITYM? $ date -d '2026-04-21 15:00 UTC' $ date -d '2026-04-28 23:00 UTC'

Open ##2900932
@cwebber@social.coop 2026-04-15 23:57

@bkuhn@fedi.copyleft.org @ossguy@fedi.copyleft.org I have to admit that I am pretty surprised by this post. Not in terms of being welcoming to newcomers, which is something I have advocated for and made the center of all of my FOSS work. However, the post says the following: > I encourage all of us in the FOSS community to welcome the new software developers who've adopted these tools, investigate their motivations, and seriously consider cautiously and carefully incorporating their workflows with ours. While the sentence which follows acknowledges that "seasoned software developers understand the benefits and limitations of LLM-assisted coding tools", there are two big things I expected at least acknowledged: - Many maintainers are facing *burnout* over the situation. However, I agree that addressing this in terms of norms is something we can consider - The biggest thing I am surprised to not see addressed at all is the licensing and copyright implications (cotd)

Open ##2900934