Hi Ludo, On Mon, 01 Jun 2026 at 21:35, Ludovic Courtès <[email protected]> wrote:
> *** “My motivation is different!” *** > > That’s okay! The pledge in the document derives from my motivation. > Perhaps with a different motivation you reach similar conclusions and we > can come up with a pledge that addresses both our concerns. > > The “Motivation” section gives context, but what matters in the end is > the pledge. FWIW, although aligned with the frame of your “Motivation“ section, I understand that this frame might appear confrontational by our other comrades and thus such context leads to a difficult discussion about what really matters: pledge a regulation about GenAI. IMHO, if we keep as-is this “Motivation” section for some “context“, then the heart of the GCD will be locked and we’ll hardly reach a consensus. My imperfect proposal with [0] is to (1) make clear the shared motivation and (2) keep all the concerns many of us have. About (1), the legal framework is clearly an uncharted territory that I hope we all agree and the ethical framework about how to implement an “open source AI model” raises many uncertainties too. Then (2), I think it’s important to remove the opinionated language. Claiming “GenAI launders the reciprocity” isn’t a fact but its interpretation. The “huge ecological footprint” isn’t a fact but its interpretation. Etc. Etc. Well, do you need to explain how to connect the dots of all the links pointing to facts or provide an opinionated interpretation? For instance, when people disagree against “huge ecological footprint”, they do not deny the fact but they interpret this fact using another scale of values than yours (and mine!). If I say: « “computing as an hobby” takes us in the opposite direction of 2015 Paris Agreement ». It’s a fact: computing as hobby isn’t sustainable. Another fact: Guix as a rolling release with many packages isn’t ecologically sustainable with the lens of 2015 Paris Agreement. Then because you probably disagree, or maybe because you think these facts are more complex than my claim, you might focus on this paragraph and not on the heart of my message. ;-) If the “Motivation” section isn’t that important, why are you spending this energy for explaining the context instead of rewording it using a less opinionated language? Cheers, simon 0: Re: Submitting GCD 008: “Standing up for human crafting” Simon Tournier <[email protected]> Tue, 09 Jun 2026 20:00:28 +0200 id:[email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2026-06 https://yhetil.org/guix/[email protected]
