If someone is only willing to contribute to a project if they are allowed to use LLMs, then I think they don't really care about the project and only about the thrill of being seen as a "contributor"

The real problem is skill atrophy. Already, many programmers claim they can’t work without the use of LLMs. It would not shock me if 95% of people calling themselves programmers today would not be able to code themselves out of a cardboard box a few years down the line. (And they’d see it as a good thing, too.)

Or if I use software that has a pain point (like VLC not allowing play/pause on mouse click by default, because of the stupid DVD legacy, that nobody uses the player for) - then a LLM generated quick fix is suitable.

There are good reasons to not accept LLM code outside of trusted, core contributors. But this is just ridiculous purity testing.

> The free labor you provide has to be artisanal, or you're not a "real" contributor.