Ooh, that’s one I hadn’t seen. Thanks for sharing!

Very much so! And for those curious, there’s more techniques to prepare for global warming over at !disasterresponse@slrpnk.net.

Devuan has made no official statements on their stance about LLM use. Until they do, it is not known if they would be a safe haven or not.

The only debian based distro that has publicly taken a stand against LLM/AI’s is AntiX linux.

1. Simply using an AI that’s run on a corporate data centers encourages the construction of yet more data centers, with all of the environmental/climate negatives they bring, as well as local harms they induce on the people living near them, such as increased electricity rates.

2. Using corporate AI directly helps the financial situations of those giant corporations (by boosting usage/user numbers, they are able to attract more investment capital), most of which are ran by right-wing CEO’s who are more than willing to collaborate with and fund fascist governments to ensure that they are not regulated in search of both maximum profits. Some of these companies, such as Nvidia, Palantir and Oracle, genuinely appear to be seeking to use these tools for what would previously be considered crackpot conspiracy theory levels of public control and surveillance.

3. I’m wary of the potential effects of AI usage resulting in declining or stagnating critical thinking based on some preliminary studies (example 1, example 2).

4. I do not think LLM’s can be “just a tool” as many claim.

5. 99% of LLM’s (the ones virtually everyone use) are trained on copyrighted code that is incompatible with GPL licensed projects. LLM’s have a 3 to 10% chance to unknowingly reproduce the copyrighted code perfectly, introducing legal plagiarism into an open-source project, which could easily open up the developers to being sued in the future if companies scanned open source repos for copyright violations.

6. Many courts are ruling that LLM generated code cannot be copyrighted at all, meaning that it also cannot be legally made GPL, losing the protections from corporate exploration the GPL normally grants. https://fsfe.org/news/2026/news-20260825-01.html

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.

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…

Ubuntu, Mint and PopOS are all based on Debian, so they will inherit the LLM code that Debian inevitably will accept now.

Difference is, Systemd wasn’t specifically being used to facilitate fascist governments surveiling their populace or contribute to global warming like LLMs are.

Anarchism is the only ideology that says “Don’t give me power, instead spread all power out as much as possible to prevent dictatorships and any ability for corporations or a state to exploit others.”

From historical records, when it’s able to be tried, it works like it says on the tin.

It may not be possible to do in the app, as I believe that is not feature complete yet. You’ll likely have better luck from a regular browser.

When the surveillance is being sold to fascist governments to identify, suppress and imprison dissidents, it is fascist.

From what I understand, while OpenBSD is currently not accepting LLM contributions, they mostly made that choice out of legal copyright concerns, and seem like they would jump on the bandwagon when they consider it to be safer legally.

Most are operated by sociopaths and psychopaths.

You absolutely can subscribe, comment, and like videos from his channel from your Tilvids instance, you just need to navigate to his channel within your own instance.

I believe if you put his channel URL into Tilvid’s search box, the two instances should federate and his content should show up for you to interact with.

I also found this video which shows how to subscribe to channels from other instances: https://tube.jeena.net/videos/watch/51a189cf-3372-4f97-9ff7-b5982dce4c9e

If a corporation helping a fascist government surveil and detain citizens in opposition to the government securing more totalitarian power isn’t fascist then… What would you consider fascist behavior?

because there are several brands that were supported by Nazi’s at one time in the past.

The AI’s that most people use support fascists in the present.

There’s this list of distros that actively reject AI/LLM contributions.

I’ve found that AntiX also rejects AI usage based on a conversation about it in their forum, but they are based on Debian, so…

There’s also this list with a few more not listed in the first.

Most developers using AI/LLMs use corporate owned LLM’s, not local models (and almost certainly never a local model that is trained in a way to not introduce legal plagiarism into a FLOSS project).

Using corporate AI directly helps the financial situations of the big tech companies that host them (by boosting usage/user numbers, they are able to attract more investment capital), most of which are owned by right-wing CEO’s who are more than willing to collaborate with and fund fascist governments to ensure that they are not regulated and receive lucritive government contracts. Many of these companies, such as Nvidia, Palantir and Oracle, genuinely appear to be seeking to use these tools for what would previously be considered crackpot conspiracy theory levels of public control and surveillance.

AFAIK they do not yet have an official stance on AI/LLM use within the project.

The Free Software Foundation of Europe recently published an article detailing why it’s legally quite important for developers to disclose and carefully catalog which code was created by LLMs.

https://fsfe.org/news/2026/news-20260825-01.html

Recommendations for AI usage in Free Software contributions

With these issues in mind, the recently published Recommendations When Using LLM-Backed Generative AI Systems for FOSS Contributions by the SFC outlines some of the legal difficulties for copyright and licensing that generative systems have created for software developers who wish to write, maintain, or contribute to Free Software projects.

Notably for the purposes of this article, the SFC recommends the full recording and disclosure of how and when an AI tool was used to assist in the creation of a contribution. As stated by the SFC:

“FOSS project leaders cannot make good decisions about LLM-gen-AI policy if they cannot survey which contributions were assisted, and how much they are assisted. Part of the contribution process should (at least) include a disclosure of what LLM-gen-AI system was used, its version (as these system change over time), and a brief description of how the system assisted the contributor. This information should be included in a machine-readable format in commit logs."

Indeed, such disclosure can be an important foundational step to allow for the accurate assessment of the copyrightability of code that has been assisted or generated by AI tools, in order to assess their licensability into Free Software. Open and clear disclosure is a helpful step for the Free Software community to maintain a healthy licensing ecosystem, which is currently threatened by the legal uncertainties that come with the advent of generative AI.

Additionally, it is worthwhile for developers to document in some capacity the extent of human work that they have done in their software projects, whether it be the writing of code, the selection and arrangement of components within the project, or the extent of human modification of machine generated content.