63
LinuxBeen a long time Debian user but with the recent AI decision I am planning on moving on so anyone have an anti-AI recommendations? I understand its being used in the kernel as well but are there any distros taking a full anti-AI approach to the parts of the code they control?
Since folks seem a little confused on what I am referring to here is the mailing list page regarding the use of gen ai without disclosure vote: https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2026/08/msg00360.html
Phoronix article on it: https://www.phoronix.com/news/Debian-Votes-Responsible-AI-Use
Gentoo?
I'm not sure why you think Debian is embracing AI
They took a nuteral stance on it
Given Debian's slow development and focus on stability above all else I doubt this will make any practical difference to contributions that actually end up in releases. And honestly at this point every OS or piece of software needs to have AI reviewing its codebase for vulnerabilities, even if it's not making any code contributions.
I am probably gonna ditch linux all together because the creator has been infected by genAI ( used LLM to heko debug, which is a big sin in my codebook ), so I have been trying NetBSD. I got it installed last night, but now I need to figure out how to get xfce4 to be default desktop environment I boot into.
Someone else listed a no-ai OS website, so I am gonna look into some of the other BSDs there as well.
You may as well abandon life altogether, because life has been "infected" with reality.
And reality is shapes by our actions. We work hard enough and we may and genAI forever best case scenario. Worst I'll take is societal values equating genAI with CP levels of degeneracy and depravity.
For the people who really don't want AI in their OS, check this.
Ooh, that's one I hadn't seen. Thanks for sharing!
What about commits by Russians? Or Israelis? Or MAGAts? Or Libertarians? Or Climate change deniers?
What you are doing is not okay. You're deliberately engaging in divisive action for no logical or beneficial reason.
They don't care. They're hypocrites, filled with irrational hatred. Card carrying members of the "AI Hate Boner" club and that's all they care about. Their hatred for this narrow facet of technology gives their lives meaning.
Oh my god, you cannot be serious.
Get off the cross; we need the wood.
So . . . maybe it's a good thing that Gentoo with GNU Hurd exists? Does Hurd even have an AI policy?
Arch, Void, Gentoo, Chimera and Aeryn all have anti-AI policies.
Do you know where I can find the Arch policy?
I must have misremembered it because I also can't find an official AI policy.
But the devs have banned LLMs in their issue tracker, at the very least:
- https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/onnxruntime/-/work_items/18#note_460864
- https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/mkinitcpio-systemd-tool/-/work_items/3#note_503832
- https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/python-huggingface-hub/-/work_items/43#note_504464
i wouldn't say they're "embracing AI" or 'sloppified'.. but anyway.
i think slackware isn't using llm stuff for development. it's my daily/fav distro. but it's quite different from debian.
I believe Fedora requires disclosure on the use of LLMs in contributions, and that fully generated submissions are not allowed, so slightly better than Debian in this respect (https://docs.fedoraproject.org/council/policy/ai-contribution-policy/)
Linux Mint is always a nice option, but I can't find an LLM policy for them, but given that they are removing snaps and other Ubuntu bits that nobody likes by default, I would imagine they are more resistant on LLM contributions. They don't have a policy set in place for this though.
Arch Linux (and derivatives, I currently use EndeavourOS but many like CachyOS too!) are awesome too if you are alright with rolling release. Again, no LLM policy I can find (I didn't look very hard though, I have better things to do), but I imagine they would be more resistant to it.
Mint is still downstream of Debian though, which will make them taking a stance against it pretty tough.
I recommend:
No AI there.
This is the only answer.
What about
?
No, that harms the environment somehow, I'm sure of it.
Oh! I know. It's "fascist technology" because Texas Instruments is owned by rich people.
Texas Instruments make weapon system.
There you go. Stick with the abacus. It's the only way to be moral in his world. Of course, that's assuming you don't have a problem with the trees that died in its creation. To be WHOLLY moral, you should use rocks on the ground, in the outline of an abacus you made in the sand with your finger. And HOPEFULLY you didn't disturb the micro ecosystem of the sand when you drew it.
It does use plastic. š¤
By jove, you're right! š± Clearly it's fascist technology.
Better stick with the abacus.
There's this list of distros that actively reject AI/LLM contributions.
There's also this list with a few more not listed in the first.
Also found that AntiX rejects AI usage based on a conversation about it in their forum, but they are based on Debian, so...
Poor servo.
Wait until they find out AI is used in the Linux kernel.
Asahi Linux
Oh, thatās nice
Appreciate the list! Definitely going to be grabbing as many programs who actively reject AI as I can. Gotta support those who are keeping up the good fight! Thanks again ProdigalFrog!
I don't think you know what a distro is. You're going to need a distro that doesn't include any packages that accept AI contributions, which is impossible to detect and enforce.
I'd say wait and see what they actually do. People are super trigger happy with shitstorms these days. But maybe wait for them to actually do something bad?!
LLMs were created with the mass theft of others work by corporations that are now reselling that same information while making billions off it. Thats enough for me to want to step back from any project utilizing these tools.
making billions off it
Lol, no its all circular investing and will soon fail to prop itself up. Then all that stolen work gets sent to open weights for everyone to use. Still not the best, but you can't close Pandora's box.
The 2008 financial crisis was the largest upwards transfer of wealth in US history. There are people who still haven't financially recovered what they lost to this day, but the US economy had regained more than it lost within 2 years. It's just that 90% of it went to those who lost the least.
With AI being forced into general stocks and federal bailouts practically guaranteed, it's going to be the exact same scenario. The AI companies will be "too big to fail" and we'll all be footing the bill.
Theres a ceiling to this shit though, and we are reaching it. Your population won't carry on when they can't eat, and it doesnt matter how militarized you are the US is too big to protect everything by force. You have to keep your population chill.
Still not the best, but you can't close Pandora's box.
Then mandate local ai only. Fuck big ai company with an anchor.
No one is gonna do that when they are on the cusp of eternal surveillance
We talk about opensource coding project what has to do with surveillance?
I mean if want to have "ethic" ai use ban any non local ai from use.
mandate local AI only
You said this. No one with the kingdom keys is going to do this because the actual purpose is surveillance.
Yeah but has nothing to do with context.
When the bubble bursts, do you think Altman and Amodei wonāt be richer than when they started?
I think there will be two new piƱatas in the water wars of 2035
I know we're talking about corps, but damn, humans as water piƱatas is so mad max
Its moreso their bunkers will be filled to the brim with supplies. I dont think we have that human-water converter we saw in Dune Part 2 just yet.
Just like with every financial crisis, when the bubble bursts they will get absurd amounts of money to save their unethical shite companies with money from all of us (through taxes). The rich only ever get richer.
https://isaiprofitable.com/
It's wild that Amazon alone has already pissed away more on their own than even Nvidia has earned back. I'm also surprised that Anthropic still isn't remotely profitable given the sheer volume of money the rest of the corporate software world dumped into Claude Code and how much pressure Anthropic applied to monetize it. That alone should be enough to show that it is impossible for AI to be profitable in any traditional sense.
Their actual plan is to monopolize information and basically use (preferably their own) AI as the middleman and broker for all data and information and knowledge and advertising that any human being ever sees. In that, they might eventually be successful. At least if they don't run out of money trying (almost certain), and we don't kill them off or blow them up first.
The meme about Nvidia selling pickaxes to gold diggers really is accurate
That does seem to be their strategy, at least on its face. Although I'm not even sure I even really believe that is profitable, or if they're cooking the books with such incestuous partnership agreements that it's to the point where Nvidia might be effectively "buying" chips from themselves with their own money on their partner's behalf. I guess time will tell if they're actually the next Enron or not, but I don't trust any business that's AI related at this point.
God damn love to see it
Yeah. But my point is: They're not utilizing those tools. At least not yet.
Looking back at my Linux experience, I have a lot of trust in the Debian community. Including to do the right thing. Even if it's difficult. They don't always get everything right. But they're pretty alright. I wouldn't just throw it all in the bin because of some hypotheticals. And democracy isn't easy. We judge people by what they do. (At least I do.)
I understand they may not be utilizing them yet, but the vote was approval of the tools without disclosure. So this isn't hypothetical, they are going to begin using them and therefore it makes sense for those with concerns regarding the technology to start looking for alternatives. It doesn't require them to start adding AI chat bots to Debian or anything like that for me to make this move. The tool itself is the problem.
That remains to be seen... As I said, they earned my trust over many years. Maybe they're able to tackle it, as they faced other challenges. I mean you're free to throw away democracy on a whim. I think it needs to be addressed and tackled. Votings have turned out with bad results before. It's ugly. But I'm still subscribed to the ideology. My red line is something bad actually happening not just on paper and in some hypothetical future. Until then, there's plenty time to repent. I still have my hopes up. They're good people and have been doing a phenomenal job until now. I don't think I want to ignore that. But I'm not stopping you from having some alternative plan ready. š That's not a bad idea either. All I'm saying is: Don't borrow trouble. (And "Donāt throw the baby out with the bathwater." Democracy might indeed be a good thing, despite it's downsides.)
The tools used dont change the core principles which in Debians case is the social contract.
Slop is never going to get through any serious quality control.
If it comes, it comes. Will be a shame. But until then I will happily keep using it.
There are plenty (and I mean plenty) of free open-source AI, including some with open datasets that are not stolen.
I really wish people wouldn't use "AI is theft" as a blank term because the technology itself is not inherently bad. We can hate OpenAI and still run local models.
By the way, there's like two open-source LLMs, which are large enough to be usable in some form. And one of them claims not to contain pirated training data. It's pretty much the opposite of "plenty".
Which ones are those two?
Yeah, good question! I bet nobody even knows their names. I had hoped to get a reply by @popcar2@programming.dev or @sims@lemmy.ml who seem to know plenty of them?!
I was talking about the RedPajama project who recreated the dataset of Meta's LLaMA and proceedingly trained a model on it. And Apertus by the ETH ZĆ¼rich. They also factored in ethics when compiling the dataset.
I made a post asking on !localllama: https://programming.dev/post/55905594
In case anyone knows about the existence of such models, please educate me over there!
One more than i knew thank.
If you believe all that then you need to stop using linux all together. Linus sees AI tools as just tools so they can be used in the development if the Linux kernel. So Linux is a project using them. You must now stop using Linux.
Correct.
Mentioned this in the description of the post already.
All you said is that you know they use it. You didn't answer why it's ok there? Also, Linus didn't put it up to a vote.
Never said it was okay there. Purpose of this post is to locate a linux distro that isn't using AI with what is under its own control. Can't control the kernel but I can look for distros that share similar ethics.
Distro hopping was a hobby before people had reasons to distro hop. If Ć¾ey have time and some personal motivation to look around, why discourage Ć¾em? It's not as if having a few fewer users is going to hurt Debian; on Ć¾e contrary, Ć¾e justification for embracing AI had been "we're overworked." Risking AI troubles is fixing Ć¾e wrong problem; instead, encourage users to be a drain on some oĆ¾er distro's maintainers!
They just recently did something bad.
What did they do? All I saw was them talk and do democracy. All of that is allowed from my side. I don't think they incorporated any AI stuff (yet). At least I'm not aware of anything?!
They decided to take a vote on whether or not to "Ban LLM contributions" where the proposed policy wasn't all that well thought out, and ended up settling on a subsequent proposal which was even worse, enshrining in official policy the standard that LLM contributions are just fine actually and don't even need to be disclosed. The governance system, in this case, failed spectacularly. The contributors they will lose as a result of this are in my view likely to be more valuable ones than those they'd have lost had the vote gone the opposite way. It's substantially worse than having done nothing at all. It does not inspire confidence in the future of Debian, and is enough to have many of us looking around to see what alternatives might exist.
@kbal @WorkingPie @hendrik Banning LLM contributions would be, at best, a symbolic gesture about a heavily politicized topic. For a team like debian, the concern should be about the quality of the contribution not what tooling was used.
Yes. And it goes further than that: Maintainability should also be a concern to maintainers. Doing good in the world is what pretty much all Free Software community projects are trying to achieve. They have to deal with licensing issues... It's complicated.
I think democracy is a good thing. Full stop.
It ain't easy though. Not even for the Debian community. But what's the alternative? Some corpo distro? They're going to adopt AI as well. And benevolent dictator might be alright... Yet, I personally still prefer a democracy. Even if it's difficult. Sometimes voting results are sub par. But we need to deal with that, not drop it once the first difficulty arises?! What kind of strategy is that? I don't think anyone is getting anywhere if they just keep dropping everything once they're faced with problems.
Maybe this is the push you need to . . . Yes, maybe itās time for . . . FreeBSD.
Search your feelings. You know it to be true.
I've been tempted to give it a go a few times. Mainly for fun tbh. Appreciate the recommendation!
I believe that there is now LLM generated code in the Linux kernel, so BSD is probably going to be where this path leads you. Solaris or AIX maybe ;p
FreeBSD has been slop for a while, the only slopfree BSD remaining is NetBSD, but that's probably not practical to actually use.
What about openBSD? I doubt the most secure OS would want llm code.
FreeBSD does not include AI features in its core operating system, but the FreeBSD community and Foundation have explored AI-assisted tools for specific tasks like vulnerability discovery and driver development.
https://freebsdfoundation.org/blog/freebsd-ai-assisted-vulnerability-discovery-project-launch/
I've been meaning to revisit FreeBSD for a while, I just haven't gotten around to it.
I used FreeBSD extensively from versi9n 3.3 to 5something and barely touched linux back then. Only reason why I moved to linux was the larger community.
Then suddenly Linux became a good desktop OS without much hazzle at all, so it replaced both desktop and server-side use for me.
How is FreeBSD as a desktop OS these days? I vaguely remember compiling xfree86 from /usr/ports some 25 years ago, and dicking around with monitor sync rates to get Gnome to display properly.
To be honest that was sort of my story too - played around 15-20 years ago with it, then Debian (and the rest) Got Good and I just havenāt gone back.
Maybe I was just talking to myself.
Hmm.
In purely utilitarian terms, are there any interesting differences in using freebsd or other bsds instead of linux?
NetBSD is more portable than Linux and supports a lot of CPU architectures. OpenBSD is secure by default. I think the BSD'S have jails, which are better containers, but I do not know much about it.
For desktop daily use, it only matters if you really want that Unix taste.
Thank you!
Well, back in the day the guy who was really into it would bug out his eyes at you and go āOh YES! Thereās . . . ā and heād immediately list two or three huge differences and then downshift to a bunch of reasons why thatās betterā¢ and then youād go home and not remember a single one very well.
These days I donāt really know. Is there a little red devil in the house?
I had another look and I think it's basically down to Gentoo. If you're in for the BSDs, you got NetBSD as well. And OpenBSD seems to be anti AI-contributions as well. I didn't really find anything else with a strict No-AI policy.
- https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council/AI_policy
- https://www.netbsd.org/developers/commit-guidelines.html
I'll take a look at them! AerynOS seems to be the primarily distro I have found with a no AI policy but sadly its atomic. Thanks for the recommendations!
I missed AerynOS. Thanks! Let's hope you're going to find another one. Given there's lots and lots of people who don't appreciate AI written code... I feel there has to be a market for a mainstream Linux distro with a no AI policy.
Agreed! With how many linux distros we have out there some choices on AI usage would be nice!
Fantastic it is atomic. Very promising future with this independent distro in these times.
Gentoo gang rise up!
There are dozens of us! Dozens!
Surprisingly only been mentioned once, but Chimera! It's weird and strange and brilliant!
If you want something slightly more normal (well, actually, it's not any more normal, just more common), then you can get PostmarketOS installed on anything if you go outside the documentation a little (it's really not hard, pmbootstrap is quite a good utility). If you take that route, I recommend OpenRC as not only is PMOS anti-AI, but so is OpenRC!
https://chimera-linux.org/
https://chimeraos.org/
Which?
Of COURSE there are two of them.
https://chimera-linux.org/
This shit's hilarious. It's like boycotting companies where they've voted to allow people to breathe oxygen.
Everything will have AI in the future, and it's impossible to discern when it was used. Attempting to ban it is hilarious because it can't be enforced since it's undetectable, so the ban is completely ineffective. It's just pandering to luddites.
At least it's amusing to watch.
Did you really compare using AI to breathing fucking oxygen? We will see if AI will be everywhere once the money runs dry and subscriptions increase hundredfold to compensate for the costs.
I agree, but is it ever going to conpletely dissapear? I understand and loathe how big corps are pushing their bubbles to maximize profits and run with the money, I am for forbidding massive datacenters and everything that will just make all of us and the planet worse, but once all that passes and the dust settles, llm and such are tools, are they going to dissapear? I myself see them as a tool, as a hammer, not to be used for cooking, laundry and such, but a tool nonetheless, is banning the whole thing realistic? Perhaps I am missing much info here though.
I did. It's going to be ubiquitous. I know the majority of Lemmy wishes it wasn't, but wishing doesn't change anything.
Every single of the involved companies could go bankrupt and it wouldn't change a thing. I mean, I have several different models on my phone, depending on my planned usage, and things are just starting to gain momentum.
Some things should never have AI because it makes them worse. Your toaster, fridge, toothbrush bedside light, sofa, monitor, bicycle, mouse, keyboard, etc. Adding AI to these makes them strictly worse. Of course the same is true in software. If you have software that does what you want now, poisoning it with AI is purely destructive.
And then there are mixed cases. You could throw in AI and possibly solve some problems or add new features, but maybe your cure is worse than the original issue, and maybe most people don't like the new features... So then in the commercial world, the bosses will force you to add AI to drive sales, because version bumps sell product, even if the general public thinks it's shit.
But hey, you do you. Say it is inevitable. Say it will be everywhere when we didn't need it to get what we already have, which is quite amazing already. I think reality shows our skills and proves you wrong.
As a person who agrees with you:
Can you at least try to be convincing instead of coming off like an asshole?
I would, but I've spent months being belittled by people on Lemmy insisting I'm wrong. Only those people with that attitude would be offended by my tone, so it seems appropriate, no?
Nothing wrong with being a Luddite, the movement was originally for workers rights and not removing thousands of years of handed down artisan craft that was being industrialized. We both know technologies like this are being used to concentrate wealth. I'm personally not against AI as long as its used in moderation, but insulting those who want to boycott because they see the harms of wide scale usage is simply ignorant, much like your comparison to the Luddite movement.
I'm against AI when it replaces human art, or substantially degrades quality
I don't see code at art, and AI code sufficiently reviewed by a human isn't bad quality. Saying that as a dev myself
AI code with sufficient review is good enough for Torvalds, good enough for me
That being said, I hate AI websites. They all look so generic. Claude especially really has a style it uses every damn time. Web design is at least partially art, and AI sucks at it
I donāt see code at art
A lot of people see programming as "type the right instructions in order to do a job".
But that's not what "programming" is. It's a process: take an idea, break it down to parts, translate those processes into code, then put it all together in a way that works. You can write countless variations of code that all accomplish they same task,but someone that's good at programming will do it in a way where the parts fit together elegantly and efficiently.
I've looked at beautifully written projects and messes of sloppy illegible code the technically "work". There's a difference: one is the work of artists and the other isn't.
Painters do the same thing when they take an idea and turn it into smears of paint on canvas. The only difference is the medium and tools.
Okay, then, Neo-Luddite/technophobe. Specifically, the people who are opposed to the technology for sake of being opposed.
I personally believe that governments should implement an AI tax, so that the technology created with the combination of everyone's contributions actually benefits everyone. However, whether that happens or not, the technology isn't going anywhere. And it's not detectable. So being in opposition to it is pointless.
They should oppose data centers, or specific uses of AI (such as for military purposes) but a blanket opposition to the technology itself? It's moronic.
š Here's a star: š«
Thank you, Experimental Guy. I'll put it on my fridge to remind me of the time I got a star from you.
You realize that youāre in a tech sub right?
No, my Lemmy client combines the comments from all the subs for a post into a single view. You may be replying to this comment from a tech sub, but that's not the view I have.
Damn it I was just asking myself the same question. I don't expect it to be easy to find one that's anywhere near as good as Debian but without that one problem. I think a lot of them won't have any firm policies yet.
Gentoo, postmarketOS, GNU Guix, Chimera Linux? Not seeing myself abandoning Debian because of that decision though.
Guix didn't adopt any policy
Definitely will take a look at them! Appreciate the recommendations!
I think it'll get harder and harder to find 'pure' distros. For a while you can maybe rely on something similar to Gnu linux-libre kernel that removes proprietary blobs, or BSD, or Gnu Herd kernels etc, but linux-libre is already a pain if you need certain hw drivers, and eventually an anti-ai kernel will become crippled even worse, and it will become too hard to keep track of what kernels/parts of kernels is AI assisted code or not.
In the future, more and more new features will be from ai assisted code, and pretty soon, the anti-ai kernel will lose out to ai-assisted kernels in features, speed and soon stability (bug-finding etc).
The same goes for the rest of the distros that tries to avoid ai-assisted tools and code, and you/others will imho get completely swamped by this transformation. In fact, you will most certainly need an agent to keep constant track of this development.
I'm okay with AI, but I kind of feel for those trying to avoid it. Its hard enough just to avoid proprietary crap, and to me, avoiding ai-assists, is an even bigger mountain to climb. I do wish you all best of luck on that journey.
Ps. There ARE fully open models trained on fully libre with open libre data-sets, and for you - ethical data oriented - you could/should? probably accept that 'non-pure' situation, and use such an open llm to either maintain an ethical distro, or keep unethical ai-assist as low as you can get away with, for as long as you can.
would you mind sharing an example of such libre model? i'm not into LLMs (more like "anti-ai") and searching for keywords like "open source" llms just gives result to open(?) weight stuff like qwen
Some day I'm gonna need someone to tell me the name of such an LLM. I'm not aware of any full-libre model which is able to code on an acceptable level. I don't think they exist in this world.
Gentoo, but I think this isn't the end of the world that you think. I don't like AI but as others said, think Debian will do something at least reasonable. Also, I think there is a distinction between LLMs/AI and the crap companies like OpenAI, Microsoft, etc.
be mad but at the right thing
That is kinda crazy yeah
Debian was always the ol reliable, the alternative to Ubuntu
Tbh I am gonna trust them and not do anything
RedHat is an AI platform and I couldnt find any sort of AI policy but heard they kinda forced their developers to use LLMs?
NixOS allows AI generated code but no comments (file) with transparency and responsibility
I may be dumb but couldnt find anything in the OpenSUSE Open Source Policy so no idea there.
Arch, Gentoo, Void, Fedora...
More performative bullshit. Debian will get along just fine, maybe with fewer bugs if the LKML and Greg KH is to be believed.
Downvote away, as you haul out your phones to ask ChatJippity where to go for dinner tonight.
the second line was totally unnecessary. i guess you're having a bad day
I can recommend "outside".
Been working pretty well this year so far.
We've seen this movie before, when they adopted systemd. It'll be fine.
You should stop using Linux altogether if you want to be that much of an anti-AI snob. Linus is using LLMs on the kernel.
https://arstechnica.com/ai/2026/07/linus-torvalds-to-critics-of-ai-coding-in-linux-fork-it-or-just-walk-away/
Already mentioned this in the post description. Purpose of the post is to find linux distros with an anti-AI policy.
So, it's totally cool with you if the kernel that those anti-AI distros runs is being developed with AI?
Seems like a weird line to draw to me. But whatever. Enjoy whatever distro that is, if you find it.
GNU/Hurd maybe?
Less totally cool and more reaching for stuff that is at least somewhat doable. The Linux kernel is going to do what it wants and alternatives to it that provide the same level of functionality are just not really there at least in the areas that are important to me.
No. And I think that switching from debian because "Muuuh LLMs bad" is - while obviously your choice to do so - a stupid move.
You can't escape LLMs. The pandoras box is open. They will never disappear again, even if anthropic, openAI, google and meta are sucked into a black hole tomorrow (an event that I would celebrate big time), LLMs would still exists and be here. Instead of trying to avoid anything LLM-made, you should try to escape bad and abusive LLM projects. So no OpenAI, anthropic etc, and no shitty big tech LLMs in general.
At the end of the day, I don't think you will find a distro that is truly AI free. In general, you will most likely not find SOFTWARE that is truly AI free.
I'd want to avoid the Pandora's box of shit as best I can.
Well, living in a hut somewhere in a forest is probably the only way to actually avoid it lol.
Nothing wrong with bushcraft.
Shit if it was legal, I'd probably be down ngl.
It can be if you own the land or have permission from the owner.
Depends on the country I guess. In germany and austria, you can't legally live in a location that doesn't tick certain checkboxes, even if you're living there willingly. You need stuff like sewage, water, electricity and a bunch of other (often nonsensical) things, and even if you own a piece of land in the middle of nowhere and you build a cabin and - somehow - tick all those boxes, if the land isn't zoned for living (meaning it's agricultural, industrial or something like that), living there is legally impossible and you're living in 24/7 threat that your home is taken away. And most european country I'm somewhat familiar with have similar rules.
some form of BSD, because the entirety of the linux kernel is about to have the same attitude :
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-Is-Not-Anti-AI
Torvalds wrote on the mailing list:
"[In response to a comment: It seems like [1] expresses a very anti-LLM position in general"]
Yes.
And no, that's not the position of the Linux kernel.
I realize that some people really dislike AI, but this is an area where I'm willing to absolutely put my foot down as the top-level maintainer.
Linux is not one of those anti-AI projects, and if somebody has issues with that, they can do the open-source thing and fork it.
Or just walk away.
AI is a tool, just like other tools we use. And it's clearly a useful one.
Already mentioned it in the post description. The posts purpose is to find linux distros that don't use AI in their own code. Sadly can't do much when it comes to the kernel.
Ok... So what's the point?
Mental illness is their point.
The posts purpose is to find linux distros that donāt use AI in their own code.
They all do, Torvalds checked in code that had AI assistance
I understand the kernel has utilized AI. I am referring specifically to the work done on this distro end. The rest of the software outside the kernel. Not much that can be done regarding the kernel unless someone does an anti-AI fork
Ok, seriously. What is an operating system to you? Where and why are you drawing the line at the distro? You can get linux DEs working in openBSD or use much of the *nix ecosystem there without kernel AI.
The Linux distributions are basically a preconfigured file system installation and package management system with default configs and applications. What exactly are you trying to boycott by boycotting Debian but not Linux?
Debain
Please stop hyping up the power of text generators. LLMs aren't predators with will of their own, they only have as much power as we are willing to cede to them.
The more afraid we are of slop doing something other than just being slop, the more power we are giving the companies (which are harmful) to actually control us. Don't help them.
It's not due to them being a boogie man or not. LLMs have been created through the mass theft of others work and ethically I want no part of it. Asking for a distro without ai contribution is just doing what linux is best at. Providing choices to its users.
You are giving slop WAY too much power over your life, imo. Avoiding Linux entirely because you might accidentally touch some generated code is pathology.
Right? It's hilarious how mentally ill these people are. It's like being afraid of birds.
I'm no fan of slop but I'm not going to stab myself in the eyes to avoid looking at it
On the other hand: The more naive someone is, the more they'll get manipulated and exploited. And ignoring problems doesn't solve them either. It regularly makes everything even worse...
What does that have to do with slop?
And that's okay from your perspective?
Debian isn't "ambracing AI"? Where'd you get that?
Ubuntu has been making plays in that direction. Not the same thing.
Debian devs voted to allow AI contributions.
https://www.theregister.com/ai-and-ml/2026/08/30/debian-votes-to-let-contributors-code-with-ai/5293421
Not even the same thing. They're not stupid. They know people are going to use it. EMBRACING it would be more like adding AI nonsense tools wherever they can, and rely on automated systems that are based on LLMs to contribute code, which is not what's happening here.
Posted some context in the description but the short version is Debian maintainers just voted to allow AI code without disclosure. Here is the vote: https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2026/08/msg00360.html
Because the people submitting the code are to be held responsible as always. If you are using Claude gemini or whoever and submit its code without checking. And you fuck something up that is on you, and you will be held responsible. Is how it should be.
People are going to use it if they want to. And realistically there isn't a lot that you can do to stop it all. They'll just start using it without attribution. There is no automated system that will be able to stop it. And policing it manually will do nothing but bogg down the current maintainers allowing them to accomplish even less.
If someone is submitting a lot of problematic slop code they don't understand. They will be booted from the project like any other bad maintainer.
Are you sure you're not mixing up Debian for Ubuntu?
I'm pretty sure Debian just said they weren't going to allow AI contributions
Posted some context in the description but the short version is Debian maintainers just voted to allow AI code without disclosure. Here is the vote: https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2026/08/msg00360.html
Am I reading it wrong? Did ban ai via social contact not win?
Nope. It's a little confusing to read but option 5 won. It's showcased in the part that lists the winner.
The pro-AI option that doesn't require disclosure won. It has already caused one Debian developer to resign, and an ex-dev to comment on it.
