This is the posts that went off into the weeds on generative AI utility, morals and other philosophizing, split from https://discuss.haiku-os.org/t/haikode-putting-ai-in-haiku/19685/56.
There is not a complete consensus among the moderators over whether debate over these issues is by-definition off-topic for a thread about a generative AI-related project. It’s pretty clear that, in this case at least, it totally derailed the original thread.
16 posts were merged into an existing topic: genAI moderation temporary thread
I honestly don’t understand why, when communicating one would feel the need to summarise with AI, a post that they had supposedly just written.
What purpose could that possibly serve, and how could someone be so deficient as to be unable to summarise (by themselves) a project they had just been working on?
This whole reliance on AI thing really makes no sense to me and is frankly worrying that such a huge dependency has developed among so many people in such a short span of time.
I have colleagues now who have an AI schedule their day for them and then they are surprised sometimes when they look at their own calendar app, like… oh, I have a meeting with ____, best head off then… How much control over their lives are people willing to cede to other people they’ve never met?
/rant
It is disrespectful to call people deficient because of using specific tools. People are free to use any tools they want, make personal schedules with AI etc.. Nobody force to use that tools yourself, but you have no rights to enforce or prohibit using legal tools to others.
Something being “legal” doesn’t automatically make it morally correct. If a person has to use a tool with a really bad environmental (energy and water) and societal impact (displacing people to build datacenters, taking jobs) that was built using stolen assets (these companies routinely ignore copyright) and slave labour (most of the electronics industry) instead of writing a bit about what they created, then that person loses a lot of respect in my eyes.
There are no universal morals, many people genuinely think that using AI tools are perfectly morally valid. It is disrespectful that you come to forum topic about AI tool and start talking about your moral concerns about AI tools. It is your personal problem problem who you choose to respect and who not. Coming to every AI topic to show your disrespect is just flood. There are already multiple dedicated topics to discuss AI concerns.
There are no universal morals
Please tell me: In which moral framework are children working in mines alright?
Coming to every AI topic to show your disrespect is just flood.
I’m not doing that? I think you have me confused with someone.
All that being said, I agree with @GraXXoR here. Why would you need AI to write a small post about what you created? I personally enjoy telling people about what I made and wouldn’t want that to be taken away by a machine.
15 posts were merged into an existing topic: Haikode: putting AI in Haiku
An AI tool has its place, and what that place is can only be understood by understanding what the tool can and cannot do. Thinking that AI is a competitor to the human mind is foolish. If we talk about copyright infringement, then yes, AI violates copyright because it secretly uses material without the authors’ permission. For this reason alone, AI can only be used for research and play.
A post was merged into an existing topic: The great genAI moderation debate, vol. 1
Everyone, please calm down first. As far as I understand, it has been an agreed-upon principle in the past that code generated by LLMs should not be incorporated into the main Haiku code for various reasons (such as AI slop and copyright issues), as far as I know. And I think this reason is reasonable.
However, I’m not sure whether the principle of banning applications made with LLMs or even writing that received LLM assistance is a fixed rule. If there was something I didn’t know, please let me know.
From what I’ve read in this discussion thread, a kind piece polished by an LLM seems better than a human-made piece that is unfriendly to others. In any case, if you want to consider it “cheating” whenever an LLM is involved, would you also consider a child’s writing, written with a mother’s help, as “cheating”? AI as a technology can certainly be criticized, but I wish it would be a little more lenient toward the new people who come to the community.
Apologies for my language earlier. It was unprofessional…
My personal stance is that AI should be kept well away from all hobbies and anything that is ostensibly a human-lead community. Regardless whether or not it is considered “cheating”, sustained exposure to AI assistants clearly, scientifically and demonstrably have measurable negative impacts on human intellect, memory retention and recall, interpersonal skills, mood, creativity, not to mention the financial, environmental and social costs that are destroying communities across the US and beyond, bringing the water and power grids to their knees wherever a data centre springs up, forcing up utility prices and destroying land value for miles around.
The devastating impact it has had on the home computing and electronics markets as a whole should also not be understated. And more personally, I think any technology that appears to be responsible for assisting in multiple suicides should be reined in.
IMHO, preferably it should be limited to when absolutely necessary to protect one’s job, for example, where demanded by a supervisor or boss. So I agree on Haiku’s current blanket ban on AI and believe it should be extended to all media and documentation, too. Again, not because it’s cheating but because of the overall negative effect that sustained AI use has on those who use it extensively.
Anyway, once again, sorry for the tone of the comment, eariler. I’ll be saying nothing more on the topic here on out.
Cheating is only applicable when code is written with educational or training purposes, especially when submitted to some kind of school/college/university etc.. It is not applicable to production code.
Cheating is only applicable when code is written with educational or training purposes, especially when submitted to some kind of school/college/university etc.. It is not applicable to production code.
It would also be cheating if you tried to submit AI generated co to a project that does not allow it while trying to pass it off as human-made.
This is a rant. If it offends you, first ask yourself if you are part of the solution or part of the problem before responding.
I’ve been staying out of this but in my mind, forum admins and Haiku devs don’t like AI, so a new category was created for those that do to not upset anyone who wants to have nothing to do with AI. This was so baiting and heated discussions were avoided and everyone didn’t descend in the AI debate mode in the main forum topics. AI people are now respectful and use the AI category. But now you say it is fine for people to start the same arguments in the categories that are allowed to talk about AI? This seems like a double standard and I respectfully disagree with you position. You don’t want AI, fine - we have a place to discuss it that doesn’t hurt your feelings. But you are allowed to come and bait the respectful and productive threads about AI? Double standards.
I’m still flabbergasted that both PowerPC and ARM ports boot to a desktop because of AI, but you devs are unwilling to accept the code back. That seems incredibly short sighted and fairly destructive behaviour. I mean TabbyOS is doing something you guys were only dreaming about before, and Haiku has booted on an M1 MacBook. Meanwhile, your code boots in x86 and x64, which is amazing , but pretty much nothing else. I guess RISCV, but it’s unclear what specific boards or if that code is even in the main repository.
It sometimes feels like NIH syndrome in Haiku devland. It quite sad to see that.
I’ll just add a +1, though I think AtomoZero would give this post a +1000! 
I recently managed to apply a patch with Claude’s assistance that enables multi-core support for Haiku on my Sony VAIO P netbook (the 2017 Atom-based model). Before that, I could only use half of the CPU cores.
While the VAIO P boasts a truly timeless design, its unique and limited hardware specs meant that AntiX Linux or WinXP was practically the only viable operating system for it. However, after coming across a post by a Japanese friend who experimented with Haiku on VAIO P, I decided to give it another try. To my delight, Haiku delivers significantly better performance than AntiX. Lately, I’ve been enjoying the process of “baking” the necessary applications myself—though I say “baking” because I’m configuring and compiling existing tools rather than building them from scratch.
To some, this niche setup and endeavor might seem rather bizarre or even repulsive.
In the country where I live, two semiconductor giants are thriving off the AI bubble, with plans to expand their facilities even onto former military grounds. From public officials(also president) to young students, society as a whole is deeply captivated by AI, to the extent that local governments offer subsidies for AI subscription fees. At the same time, AI-driven drones are causing tragic casualties in Eastern Europe, and global temperatures continue to rise each year. It almost feels as though we might all end up oversteamed like dim sum before reaching our natural lifespans. Given all this, should I refrain from using AI altogether? I don’t believe so. Discarding a perfectly functional VAIO P simply because it only utilizes half its CPU capacity seems far more harmful to our planet.
In my neighborhood, there is a fried chicken restaurant where robots handle the frying. Honestly, the quality is exceptional—likely due to the precise control over frying duration and sauce measurements. While I order from them occasionally, that doesn’t mean I stop supporting our local family-owned shops. I genuinely believe that humanity and automation can coexist harmoniously.
Moving forward, I intend to keep advocating for principled AI and raising my voice for the ethical development of software, participating in protests if necessary. I welcome open and thoughtful discussions on this topic. However, I sincerely hope we do not reach a point where developers are sidelined or newcomers are ousted simply for leveraging LLMs in their writing or coding.
This one, at least, was done entirely without AI. That work isn’t merged yet, but enough was merged so that ARM64 builds from trunk boot to desktop in QEMU already. All without AI.
The upstreamed portions of the RISC-V port are sufficient to boot bare-metal on at least a few devices. In fact one of the HaikuPorts RISC-V builders is bare-metal (the other is a QEMU VM running on an x86 host.)
How is it “destructive” to refuse to accept some particular kind of contributions? Maybe “short-sighted” by some perspectives, but how is it “destructive”?
There is a tension in the Haiku community between people who primarily want to have fun, and people who want Haiku to be a fully viable desktop OS they can use as a daily driver. (Sometimes these tensions exist within people and not just between people, too, to be sure. And this is also a broad oversimplification, and there are probably people whose interest in Haiku doesn’t fit cleanly into either category.) This tension isn’t new, it’s existed for quite a long time (I think it was clearly already present when I joined over a dozen years ago.)
But “AI” has exacerbated this tension dramatically, because now the “fun-chasers” show off their screenshots of Haiku doing “X cool thing”, and are annoyed or upset that the development team is not interested in this. Because from their perspective, why wouldn’t we be? Aren’t we just here to have fun? Why wouldn’t we merge something that makes Haiku more fun?
But if we’re not just here to “have fun”, and that’s a secondary goal at best (or if our ideas of “fun” are very divergent), and if we care about the long-term health and viability of the codebase (among other things), then rejecting “AI” code can and does make a lot of sense.
I’ve been reading this forum for about ten years without posting. Over the years, I’ve read dozens and dozens of times that many developer members of the ‘Dream Team’ wrote whatever they wanted because they weren’t being paid, so they just did whatever they felt like doing. Your argument makes no sense. People are here precisely because they enjoy using Haiku and they enjoy writing applications, whether more or less useful, because they enjoy the environment. You are the only one who gets paid, unfortunately even to write these somewhat questionable takes.
Claiming that anyone using AI is only doing so as a joke is extremely offensive to those who do it in the spirit of community and share the code they’ve built. (And don’t start with the tired old argument that ‘they didn’t build anything, the LLM did it all’, because if X or Y hadn’t turned on their PC and maybe even paid for a subscription, we would never have been able to use these new, fresh, fully working, and native programs on a daily basis.)
I feel that, as usual, instead of keeping threads on track, the moderators let things stray off-topic, annoying those who aren’t interested in this drama and just want to read the updates that a developer with a huge heart is sharing with the community.
Now I’m going back to browsing with Firefox to find places talking about Haiku that are a bit more peaceful than this forum.
Still convinced that this post will stay polluted by all this off-topic blah blah, I personally apologize to the young developer who started this thread for this rather unwelcoming behavior.
But I didn’t say that. I said they were “chasing fun”. What’s the point of using Haiku on PowerPC? Is it because PowerPC is the most viable system to get work done on? No, clearly not. It’s for fun.
There are other people trying to port Haiku to PowerPC without using AI. I am guessing that they, too, are doing it “for fun”, only they have a very different idea of that than the people who use AI (and one I would agree with more IMO, even if I don’t personally have any plans to buy any PPC hardware.)