Andreas Enge <[email protected]> writes: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 11:07:19AM -0400, brian cully wrote: > I think the sentence is simply elliptic. What is meant is: > "It will be difficult to revert the consequences of there being no > regulation" - namely, once we have a number of LLM coded contributions, > these will be almost impossible to rip out again.
yeah, i get the gist, it's just a weird way to phrase it and i would completely believe others had a difficult time parsing it as well. it would have been better to phrase it as “cost of inaction” or “cost of status quo”, i think. which would mean we'd have to state the status quo explicitly (or that we lack one). while i don't think it would have changed the results of this gcd, we clearly have some kind of need for being explicit, since there's at least some confusion on what happens now re: gcd-8. -bjc
