Hello, Context:
As you may already know there have discussions around Software Heritage and the LLM model they are collaborating with for a bit now. The model itself was announced at https://www.softwareheritage.org/2023/10/19/swh-statement-on-llm-for-code/ As I have started writing some packages I became interested in how I might actually stop my code from ever reaching Software Heritage or at the very least said LLM model. Every single package in guix is added there automatically. I sent an email on Friday and I got an answer back that such consent mechanism hasn't been implemented and I was shown the legal terms. instead what I am supposed to do is: After guix has my code, my code will be automatically in Software Heritage and the LLM model. So I am supposed to opt out seperately with both of them to ensure that my code wont be used for future versions. This of course means that my code will stay forever in Software Heritage and the LLM model (or some version of it at least). The reasoning that was given was that code harvesting happens anyway and we give an opt-out. I am guessing its opt-out and not opt-in because they would have less code but this is speculation of course :) This is against our desire to make it a welcoming space and also against the spirit of our CoC. Specifically because authors do not know this happens when they submit packages to Guix. So it is all done without consent. Next Steps: So what can we do as a Guix community from here? Communication/Writing wise: 1. Add a clear disclaimer/requirment that any new package that is added in Guix, the person has to give consent or get consent from the person that the package is written in. This needs to be added in the docs and in the email procedures. 2. Make a blog post of our stance towards Software Heritage and the code harvesting they are doing. This post will write in environmental and ethical grounds why Guix is against this and mention specifically Software Heritage. This is done to separate and mention that we do not like what is happening in case anyone comes asking, and hopefully give public pressure to Software Heritage. 3. Exclude all Software Heritage merch, stands, talks, people in official capacity, logos, or anything else that participates in social events of guix and write it in some rules we have. also write in channel rules that Software Heritage is offtopic same way Non-Free Software is offtopic. 4. There doesn't seem to be any movement on the side of Guix towards: - Accountability in an official capacity of SH for the terrible handling of the trans name incident and a plan to make it easier in the future. - The LLM problem that was mentioned in this email. So with that said I urge anybody who has been in contact with them in an official Guix capacity to come forward, otherwise I can volunteer to be that. Idk if we have a community outreach thing I need to be in also for that. (we should if not) The above make two assumptions: 1. That the Guix community is against LLM/"AI". Which for environmental and ethical grounds we should be. 2. That we are a consent culture. Coding Wise this has been talked about before some potential options are: - Communicate with Software Heritage to be able to give a "sign" that the code that is sent should go or not in the code harvesting project. - Remove all Software Heritage integration since its too hard to be ethical about it and built a better solution. Conclusion: To summarize from the steps I wrote above, it seems Software Heritage makes it harder and harder for us to actually be an inclusive, welcoming space we want to be. Idk what that leaves us, as I said I am not part of any "insider" discussions. But it seems to not move that much and its time to start doing actionable things in another direction. MSavoritias
