Discussion
RE: https://mastodon.social/@mcc/117564920920815136
Literally being discussed on emacs-devel now.
Proposing a novel legal attack on LLM-generated source code where you claim it is incompatible with the GPL because the prompts are the source code and the emitted C or Rust or whatever is a compiled binary
@mcc @tusharhero This one in particular is very funny, since Eli got mad at @technomancy for sumitting the Human Emacs document / petition, and here Eli gives a perfect argument for why we can't have vibecoded software in Emacs https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2026-11/msg00084.html
@cwebber @mcc @tusharhero @technomancy This argument assumes that LLMs can only generate code because code was part of their training data, which I understand not to be the case, considering how you can supply an LLM with the specification of an new, made-up language, and it can still generate code for it. And anyway, in this case the LLM was used to transpile C++ to Elisp while running it against existing tests, which is a different situation that just generating code from scratch.
@pkal @mcc @tusharhero @technomancy I didn't make that argument, and I am not replying to the library here and how it works. I am replying to Eli's argument specifically.
@cwebber @mcc @technomancy very strange that so much depends on framing.
@tusharhero Yes… ha ha ha… yes!