spoiler
When I say LLMs I always mean opensource, openweight models not OpenAI/Anthropic/X-AI crap, these companies are trying their darndest to spread misinformation and lobby to quell and prevent the development of these opensource models, they should be punished by creating an alternate ecosystem untouched by the opinions and whims of these feudalistic tech lords
The exam/criteria should be broad and rigorous, The license issued and the exam should be private(tied to a handle not PI name), unique and publicly verifiable.
Right now the onus is on individual projects to take a stance for/against LLM use for any contributions in their codebase.
With all the opinions floating around regarding LLM use for programming(most of which i feel is either misinformation, or technophobia), I think this would at least stem some of the legitimate concerns regarding competency and responsibility.
What kind of criteria or tests are you imagining?
A certificate after a test would only show capability, not continued practice. So my confidence in it wouldn’t be very high. Demonstrated practice seems more applicable than some cert some time ago. Some people chase certs to check boxes rather than prove or apply the practice.
I always mean opensource, openweight models not OpenAI/Anthropic/X-AI crap
Honest question: is it even possible to separate oneself completely from AI’s multifaceted exploitation by using “FOSS AI”?
And if yes, does such ethically acceptable “FOSS AI” exist?
Great idea. Bureaucracy and reducing human ability to a single score is always the right process for assuring quality.
Hey, if we don’t democratize the ability to get that single score some corporate will start charging money to do it and in a few years that will become the standard
democratize
🤣
Hey man, I understand it doesnt often feel this way, but yes bureaucracy IS an implementation of democracy.
Food standards, water standards, data protection laws, environmental laws, building standards, etc…
are all bureaucracy by the people to protect the people.
who is funding this? who gets to decide? the real.issue is, there has always been slop submissions but the barrier of entry wa shigh so few people in civilization had the skill and fewer even attempted to submit. now every si gle person alive can submit. its not an anti llm stance uts “how do i manage this side gig i dont get paid for” stance
If you’re competent, you don’t use LLMs.
So I don’t see the purpose.
Maybe a year ago. Not today.
What is the problem that this would solve?
drown out the slop. If a slop kiddie makes a 600+ diff PR, you can safely ignore it, but if a license holder makes a PR you consider it.
how does this compare with something like the vouch system, possibly with some sort of federated mechanism, so you could choose which list of users to trust
How do you identify a “slop kiddie”? It’s not like LLM users identify themselves as such.
You’ll have to judge by their code, at which point you’re already not ignoring them at all.
