i am deaf software engineer. I have written with AI because many deaf poeple don’t speak English as first language. Without AI it would take more time. All of sources must be verified to prevent hallucinations. We need some rules for using AI. It should to prevent errors that are made by AI. Edward Rue. Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone
Op 7 jul 2026 om 17:56 heeft Goffi <goffi@goffi.org> het volgende geschreven:
Hi,
This discussion is stalling.
Meanwhile, we've got specification(s?) which have been clearly written with AI, and I guess it will be more and more often the case.
As a reviewer with my council hat, I would really love to at least have disclaimer when AI is used (is it for writing whole sections, to extract a table, to write example, to check spelling/grammar).
Many big projects have a statement on AI use, e.g., CPython: https://devguide.python.org/getting-started/ai-tools/
I think XSF should have one too.
Do we need more discussion on standard, or should the board discuss that and ask a team to work on a AI statement?
Thanks Goffi
Le lundi 11 mai 2026, 09:50:19 heure d’été d’Europe centrale Goffi a écrit :
Hello everybody,
I would like to bring a discussion on AI policy. We can't really ignore anymore that modern models have become very capable, and I suspect that they are used for spec authoring.
This raises, I believe, copyright issues: if someone use AI to redact a whole section of a spec, how can we be sure that it's not an existing specs for some other place, possibly under copyright, that is copied or paraphrased? How can an author guarantee that it's original work (hint: they can't)?
I think that there are 3 distinct uses:
1. As a light formatting/checking help, for instance to generate a table from a human written section, to correct the formulation of a sentence, or to draft an example. This is notably useful for non native English speakers.
2. As a help to search existing state of art on some feature, or any kind of data, without writing anything in a protoXEP.
3. As a way to generate whole sections.
Instinctively, and If we put aside ethical and ecological concerns about LLMs, I think that 1. and 2. are OK, and 3. should be forbidden. And in all cases, it should be disclosed.
I would like your feedback on this matter, in particular people with legal knowledge.
I would like to avoid a flamewar, I know that this topic is sensitive and there opinions are highly divided, please express your opinion calmly. The fact is, we can't ignore this anymore.
Should this be discussed with board or council?
Thanks.
Best, Goffi
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list -- standards@xmpp.org To unsubscribe send an email to standards-leave@xmpp.org <signature.asc>