I understand that people have concerns, but those concerns are only relevant if they come from a maintainer or repo owner point of view.

This just isn’t true. Whether I’m a developer or not, I have to deal with the security issues that come with running the code. I have to deal with the bugs that come from it. I have to decide if I’m willing to support practices I may consider unethical used to produce the software, especially if I’m considering donating to the project. I don’t need to be a topic expert to understand that AI code is prone to bugs and security vulnerabilities, nor do I need to be one to consider the massive ecological damage and copyright violation required to train the plagiarism machine.

However, to use AI to brainstorm, get suggestions, discuss architecture, learn with examples, and assist basically like someone else is sitting next to you while you code yourself… that is something completely different, and results in a completely different outcome.

Generally, people take the most issue with using it to actually generate code in any capacity. There are purists who might insist you not even touch AI, but I think most draw the line at including code or graphics not written by a human.

In the end, it depends on can the person at the steering wheel take full ownership and accountability of the code they produced, with or without AI.

If we presume ethically neutral tools, sure, but the massive damage to ecosystems and towns that comes with training, using, and powering AI are seen by many as outweighing the utility they’re able to provide.