Conversation
| We expect authentic engagement in our community. Make sure you have added value | ||
| based on your personal competency to your contributions. | ||
|
|
||
| **Acceptable uses** include |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe go simpler: OK/Not OK ? Maybe even a table like this policy @melissawm shared:
https://github.com/uaanchorage/GSoC/blob/main/Acceptable-and-Ethical-AI-Use-Policy.md
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK, not ok feels too flat. Also I want to indicate that these are only examples and not an exhaustive list. The "include" phrasing should indicate that.
I don't like the table, because its rows are designed as good and bad behavior for a specific topic. Our exemplary approach does not match to that (What's the don't part of "Gaining understanding of the existing code").
We could make two columns with bullet points if you think a left-right separation will visually contrast the good-bad parts better.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the don't part of "Gaining understanding of the existing code
feeding the issue into the AI and using what it spits back w/o interrogation
but there's something about unacceptable/acceptable that to me feels a bit indirect
We could make two columns with bullet points if you think a left-right separation will visually contrast the good-bad parts better.
Yeah, I think that'd work better to not have things lost. Maybe a "Good" card highlighting assistive uses and a "bad" card highlighting "AI doing it for you" uses. We can then also include the check/x icons in the headers
✅ Acceptable Uses | ❌ Unacceptable Uses
| We expect authentic engagement in our community. Make sure you have added value | ||
| based on your personal competency to your contributions. | ||
|
|
||
| **Acceptable uses** include |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK, not ok feels too flat. Also I want to indicate that these are only examples and not an exhaustive list. The "include" phrasing should indicate that.
I don't like the table, because its rows are designed as good and bad behavior for a specific topic. Our exemplary approach does not match to that (What's the don't part of "Gaining understanding of the existing code").
We could make two columns with bullet points if you think a left-right separation will visually contrast the good-bad parts better.
7e292f0 to
516246d
Compare
| Generative AI tools have evolved rapidly, and their suggested results can be | ||
| helpful. As with using any tool, the resulting contribution is the responsibility | ||
| of the contributor. Discretion, good judgment, and critical thinking are the | ||
| foundation of all good contributions, regardless of the tools used in their | ||
| creation. We expect authentic engagement in our community. Make sure you have | ||
| added value based on your personal competency to your contributions. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I found this paragraph a bit awkward, but feel free to keep or ignore my suggestion which may be equally so. I didn't dare ask Claude to clean it up.
| Generative AI tools have evolved rapidly, and their suggested results can be | |
| helpful. As with using any tool, the resulting contribution is the responsibility | |
| of the contributor. Discretion, good judgment, and critical thinking are the | |
| foundation of all good contributions, regardless of the tools used in their | |
| creation. We expect authentic engagement in our community. Make sure you have | |
| added value based on your personal competency to your contributions. | |
| Generative AI tools are evolving rapidly, and can be helpful tools when interacting with the project. As with any tool, the resulting contribution is the responsibility | |
| of the contributor, and should be used in conjunction with discretion, good judgment and critical thinking. We expect authentic engagement in our community that should not be bypassed by using agents or other crutches. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changed to new wording:
Generative AI tools are evolving rapidly, and can be helpful tools. As with any
tool, the resulting contribution is the responsibility of the contributor. We
expect dedicated and authentic engagment in our community. In particular when
using AI, carefully consider what and how to communicate, question results,
think things through thoroughly and make well-informed decisions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
think things through thoroughly, and make well-informed decisions.
I'm biased towards the oxford comma.
jklymak
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me, and I think strikes a good tone.
9ac1f37 to
7643e53
Compare
story645
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pure nits but otherwise definitely think this is an improvement.
| tool, the resulting contribution is the responsibility of the contributor. We | ||
| expect dedicated and authentic engagment in our community. In particular when |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| tool, the resulting contribution is the responsibility of the contributor. We | |
| expect dedicated and authentic engagment in our community. In particular when | |
| tool, the resulting contribution is the responsibility of the contributor. In particular when |
The "dedicated and authentic" feels a bit fragmenty to me b/c of the in particular
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd like to keep "dedicated and authentic. The previous sentence attributes responsibility, and I'd like to stress the expectation of engagement. It's on the upper end of the pathos scale (to not say pathetic, because I don't intend the negative connotation of that), but that intentional to give a moral founding. Just stating the practical behaviors feels too weak.
3a11981 to
4c082af
Compare
- Change title from "Restrictions ..." to "Usage ..." which is more neutral - Introductory paragraph copied from https://devguide.python.org/getting-started/generative-ai/#generative-ai (CC0 license) - I find this a very good high-level summary of the mindset - Add lists of acceptable and unacceptable uses
|
This has become quite good! - Thanks for the input from the reviews. 🙇 |
Closes #31454.
AI Disclosure
No AI used.