http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60156 --- Comment #18 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Rafał Mużyło from comment #17)
It might be *legally binding* nonsense, but that's still nonsense. LLMs are just a tool, still quite primitive, yet already very versatile (if you know how to use it well, as seems to be the case for this werewolf).
Noise-to-value ratio is still very lopsided including from the best of LLM tamers. Something very simple is lacking and handled overly complicated clearly exposing flaws. Whenever more correct, LLM results often resemble plagiarism matching simple web searches. Rearranging words pretending it's original without crediting sources is deceitful and underwhelming.
Also, are you really able to *definitely* say that none of the wine devs has *ever* come across legally dubious code and learned something from it ? Cause in such case, you know, bridge selling...
My point regards risk management which is the point of WineHQ LLM policy considered wise vs nonsense. The tendency for LLMs to plagiarize without crediting sources presents high risk per WineHQ mission. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.