LLM-generated content policy

[twpayne]

Sadly, I'm starting to observe users posting unreviewed LLM-generated content in my repos (not just chezmoi). Specifically, I have seen:

• Users posting LLM-generated answers to other users' questions.
• Users posting LLM-generated code to "help".
• Users posting LLM-generated code that doesn't work and demanding that I fix the code for them.

In all cases, the LLM-generated content is superficially plausible but fundamentally incorrect.

It takes more effort to understand and fix the LLM-generated content than it takes to write correct content in the first place. Posting unreviewed LLM-generated content is extremely disrespectful of my, and the other maintainers', time.

Note that I don't care if people use an LLM to help them generate content, but I do expect them to review it for correctness before posting it here.

Going forward, I propose the following policy:

• Users posting unreviewed LLM-generated content with the admission that they do not understand the code will receive a single warning. If they continue to post unreviewed LLM-generated content then I will ban them.
• Users posting unreviewed LLM-generated content without any admission will be immediately be banned without recourse.

I plan to update the developer guide and issue templates with clear warnings, but would like to hear feedback from others first.

[Lockszmith-GH]

I agree with your reasoning and choices.
Bullshit generators^* are useful tools, but are not a replacement for a brain.

I love LLMs when they are useful, the same way I love search engines when they get me to what I was looking for.

Thank you for not calling this AI - as that term really annoys the hell out of me.

^* I've adopted Richard Stallman's term for a recent talk of his, where he addresses Stochastic Parrots / LLMs as Bullshit generators. I hope more people would use it as well, it describes these tools very well. However, if you feel the word bullshit is too harsh, referring to them as Stochastic Parrots can do as well.