http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60156 --- Comment #17 from Rafał Mużyło <galtgendo@o2.pl> ---
WineHQ policies regarding LLM code contributions are not nonsense but rather of good judgement per mission critical prime directive.
An LLM custom trained only on wine code may be considered near riskless but would likely be no more useful than legacy dev tools. Typical LLMs require extreme resource consumption for training to seem effective so training for wine code only is likely too clean per their inefficiency/ineffectiveness.
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). At this time they *have to* learn by bulk, cause we have yet to properly describe (in machine terms) learning by (indirect) analogy. After all, false analogy is a thing. 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... -- 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.