7 Jul
2026
7 Jul
'26
6:23 p.m.
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(a)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(a)xmpp.org
To unsubscribe send an email to standards-leave(a)xmpp.org
<signature.asc>