cross-posted from: https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/64896415
For additional context, here’s Brian’s previous blog post about the first preview release of Xfwl4, where he describes his history with Xfce and the sponsorship.
https://www.spurint.org/journal/2026/06/xfwl4s-first-preview-release
So what? As long as they do proper QA, using AI is fine.
I use Claude Code with the Fable model too. It is pretty good. It still does hallucinate once in a while. And it still does logical fallacies sometimes. But I mitigate that by using the natural neuronal network in my head to analyzing the generated code (and yes, I am the bottleneck).
Besides the potential risk of unknowable copyright infringement and the dangers that poses to FLOSS projects as I mentioned in another comment here:
Simply using an AI that’s run on a corporate data centers encourages the construction of yet more data centers, with all of the environmental/climate negatives they bring, as well as local harms they induce on the people living near them, such as increased electricity rates.
Using corporate AI directly helps the financial situations of the big tech companies that host them (by boosting usage/user numbers, they are able to attract more investment capital), most of which are owned by right-wing CEO’s who are more than willing to collaborate with and fund fascist governments to ensure that they are not regulated in search of both maximum profits. Some of these companies, such as Nvidia, Palantir and Oracle, genuinely appear to be seeking to use these tools for what would previously be considered crackpot conspiracy theory levels of public control and surveillance.
But if someone is absolutely determined to use them regardless, I would hope they either use a locally run LLM, or use a distributed model like AI Horde, as at the very least that does not encourage the construction of corporate data centers nor boost their financial prospects.
This virtue signaling needs to stop. Yes, the implications for AI are extremely dangerous and foolhardly. Taking out the pitchforks on Brian, an extremely talented and well regarded engineer in the FOSS world, is completely missing the point. It’s akin to blaming drivers of gas vehicles for global warming. The impetus for change are on the systems that put these things in place, not a FOSS dev building a WM. The incentive structure of limitless growth at all costs in the IT sector and the unfettered power projection of capital are to blame here. Until you’re willing to do something to stand up to that, then we’re all just waving our dicks in the wind here. Posting is not praxis.
We get it, you correctly arrived at the conclusion AI is bad. Welcome to the club. Brian Tarricone is a professional and I have no reservations of the quality of this code. You might as well boycott the linux kernel because guess what, AI generated code is in there too.
Classic “it doesn’t affect me” (yet), so it’s fine. Maybe you’ll change your tune when you run out of drinkable water because data centers are pumping it on top of climate change.
How on Earth could you derive “I don’t give a shit” from “stand up to systems of oppression, don’t castigate individuals”? Do your eyes even work?
This type of name and shaming just doesn’t scale. You can’t recycle your way out of climate change. This type of thinking places the responsibility on the individual, who by very nature is powerless and who’s individual actions have essentially no effect on outcome.
These types of sentiments don’t scale well into change, but it certainly allows the person making the post to feel good and to let others know they think the right things.
Refusing to use the tools that profit the very thing we want to stop is part of standing up to it, how is that not obvious?
Use of literally any electronic or battery-operated device on the planet uses metals sourced from child and/or forced labor somewhere in the world. Unless you’re prepared to move off the grid and live in the woods, these type of arguments at higher levels are endlessly pointless IMO.
It’s definitely worth buying used wherever possible, and to repair electronics whenever possible to avoid unnecessary consumption (part of why Right to Repair is so important). Similarly, it’s quite beneficial to switch to plant-based meats to avoid both unnecessary animal suffering and the carbon emissions and resource wastage that goes with industrial animal production (especially as those resources become more and more scarce due to poor crop yields and drought from climate change).
It’s often not possible to do either of those things 100%, such as it not being possible to be completely vegan/vegetarian due to a family member that isn’t on board with it, but it’s still beneficial to do what they can, even if it’s only 20, 30, or 50%.
Corporate AI usage, on the other hand, is one of those things that truly is completely avoidable with virtually no effort, and was something we all got along fine without just a few years ago. There are even more ethical self-hosted or decentralized non-corporate alternatives.
Someone deciding to ignore the harmful externalities of corporate AI is making a choice to prioritize their own convenience over helping preventing our planet from becoming extremely unpleasant for billions of people and animals to live on, or helping prevent the financing of a fascist surveillance state.
We’re not talking about you, you can do whatever you want. I’m talking about publicly naming and shaming developers for using what is now a widely accepted tool.
Creating a callout post isn’t standing up to anything, it’s just noise. You get special internet points for it, but it doesn’t mean anything and again, diverts responsibility from the people who built this fucking Torment Nexus in the first place.
The developer made this public post of their own volition, presumably for others to read and make up their own mind on. It’s not naming and shaming to alert others their DE is going to be AI coded in the future, or to point out the potential downfalls of the project adopting AI.
Come on now, you didn’t just cross post this over here without adding your own editorializing. We understand your take, it colors your opinion, thats ok. Don’t walk it back now. Own it.
You created an account a few minutes ago just to say individuals shouldn’t bear any responsibility whatsoever, and worse, that advocating for reducing the problem in a meaningful way is virtue signalling?
Your comment just so happened to grasp my attention. There’s simply no need to resort to ad hominem.
Is the BP oil spill my fault because I drive a car to work?
All of us can try to take steps to reduce our fossil fuel use, either by trying to drive less, using public transport if available, or using an e-bike if viable. Individually the contribution is small, but collectively it can add up to help reduce demand, thus reducing the financial incentive to invest in oil or drill for more.
Of course we can, but that’s not how history works. People do what they will do based on their conditioning and material conditions. Of course not always, but enough where we can derive conclusions. Shaming and finger wagging isn’t going to fix this problem. If you think one sliver of the population of Earth gives one single solitary fuck about reducing their carbon footprint, I have a bridge to sell you.
Look, I respect you and your take, I’m not trying to be an asshole. I just genuinely don’t think your approach is a viable method of achieving what you’re saying.
History has shown that it does, in fact, work like that.
I can tell when I’m not welcome. I’ll see myself out.
Have a good day.
Where is the ad hominem? If you’re going to pretend to speak Latin, at least know what the fucking words mean, you absolute potato.
And in case it wasn’t clear, that was an example of ad hominem.
The above commenter was calling into question my character because I had just created my account today. The definition of ad hominem I’m familar with:
“Attacking a person’s character or motivations rather than a position or argument.”
The commenter seems to imply that because I created my account recently, that my argument is therefore somehow not valid. I would consider that the be an attack on my character or motivation, rather than addressing my position. Would you agree or no? May have been a bit of an editorial stretch on my part, but it certainly doesn’t call for you actually calling me names and insulting me. I’m just here for some banter. Your comment is obviously malicious, and I think you’re better than that.
Edit: yep, downvote and move on. Exactly what I thought. Classic potato behavior.
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Nah, fuck Brian. He’s an AI using twat. No care for the environment, people, or IP that’s been stolen.
This AI apologizing needs to stop. Yes, the implications for AI are dangerous and foolhardy. Full stop.
How easy it is to have maximalist positions on the internet, where they never have to come into contact with reality.
Why should I take what you have to say seriously when you can’t even be bothered to read the entirety of my post where I agree AI is bad and this doesn’t make it go away
I suppose you’ll be moving off of Linux then, as the kernel devs have made their stance on AI quite clear.