Notes from #MetaBrainz Meeting 2023-06-26

MetaBrainz Meeting 2023-06-26

Meeting start: IRC Logs for #metabrainz | MetaBrainz Chatlogs
Meeting wiki page: MetaBrainz Meeting - MusicBrainz Wiki


Last meeting: 2023-06-19
Next meeting: 2023-07-03

@reosarevok: Welcome to How is it Monday again and Why is June Ending


LLM/‘AI’ code of conduct/guidelines


This is a summary only! In the order that these comments were brought up. Please read the chat logs for the full discussion.

  • the semantics of using the term ‘LLM’. Is it a future proof term?
  • do we need to cover other stuff, like AI that isn’t a LLM
  • @rob: “…I think we should limit it to CB for now. I feel that applying this rule to everything is a bit overreaching when we dont understand how it might impact non CB projects.”
  • @mr_monkey: “I think AI-assisted writing is an inevitable reality of the near future. Especially relevant for people who want to write in english (for reach) but who are not native speakers. IMO that’s acceptable, so I’m personally more tempted by options C”
  • @reosarevok: “We do have issues in the forums with posts that don’t sound like a real human wrote them” “But we can have that separately in the forum rules”
  • @reosarevok: “We also had a super long, obviously LLM generated edit note in MB recently”
  • discussion around whether we should be using the term AI or LLM [@aerozol note, at the time of this post: I’m not sure if people noticed that I used both in the draft CoC/guidelines - LLM/‘AI’]
  • @atj: Annotation - MusicBrainz - “You should never add copyrighted content copied from other resources, be they online or printed.”
  • @reosarevok: “Yeah, what atj brings up is another issue - who does even own the copyright?”
  • @yvanzo: “But I agree with the general draft otherwise: Do not submit AI-generated content without adding a clear disclaimer.”
  • discussion around whether translating text falls under ‘primarily written by LLM’, or it’s the same as using Google Translate
  • @yvanzo: I think that the upcoming EU regulation goes in the same direction: add watermarking to AI-generated images.
  • @atj: i feel that this opens up MeB to legal risks, obvious mayhem can speak to that, but it seems somewhat similar to the CAA situation
  • @yvanzo: Even if using Google Translate, it would be sane to mention the translation tool being used.
  • @rob is asked if he could ask MeB’s lawyers if anyone knows what to make of the legal issue, and he already knows the answer: “the answer is: no one does. its all too early to tell.”
  • @atj: well in that case i’d say blanket ban and review in a year or something, but it depends on the attitude to risk
  • @reosarevok: I’d personally prefer a ban but I can see the point of allowing it for people who don’t have great English or whatnot (I’d much rather they posted in their own language for us to translate tbh since they might not know the bots are changing their meaning, but)
  • @reosarevok: I think it 100% needs to be disclaimed and at least that much could be part of the general CoC
  • @yvanzo: Ideally I would vote A but I’m not sure we can enforce it, so C would be at least something.

No conclusion, but it’s also mentioned that it’s a lot to take in a meeting session with no prep. It’s agreed to revisit the topic next week, and aerozol is (politely) volunteered to make a forum post and collect community feedback.

[this discussion continues a bit after meeting end]

absent: arsh (1)

1 Like

Please leave your comments re LLM/‘AI’ policy in this very special thread:

What does it mean, in full text?
AI must be artificial intelligence, but what is LLM?

“Large Language Model”

1 Like