OpenBSD and slopcode: raindrop to a torrent?

As users, we, too, are asking these same questions, wondering just how much “AI” taint we’re willing to spread across our computers. I understand the difficult position Linux distributions are in with regard to “AI”. I mean, when even the Linux kernel itself is tainted by “AI”, a no-“AI” policy is basically an empty gesture for them at this point. Personally, I find a policy of “we don’t do ‘AI’ in our work, but we don’t have control over the thousands of components we consist of” to be an entirely reasonable, if deeply unsatisfying, position to take. What else are they going to do? You can’t really be a Linux distribution without, you know, the Linux kernel, which is, as I’ve already said, utterly tainted by “AI” at this point. Still, in the back of my mind, I always had a trump card: if all else fails, we’ll always have OpenBSD. Its project leader Theo de Raadt is deeply principled, every OpenBSD user and contributor I know hates “AI” deeply, and the project routinely sticks to their principles even when it’s difficult or inconvenient. Yes, this makes OpenBSD not the most ideal desktop operating system, but I’d rather use that than something that embraces the multitude of ethical, environmental, quality, and legal concerns regarding “AI” code completely. Imagine my surprise, then, to discover that OpenBSD already contains slopcode in its base installation, with the project’s leaders and developers remaining oddly silent about it. My friend and OSNews regular Morgan posted this on Fedi a few days ago: Nearly six weeks later, and the question of whether “AI” generated code in tmux — not tool-assisted bug finding, not refactoring, actual LLM-generated slop with questionable license(1) — that was consequently merged into OpenBSD base, is considered acceptable by the lead devs, remains unanswered. Despite Theo de Raadt’s concrete stance against any code of questionable license origin polluting the project — and the tmux merge was indeed questionable — it seems this is being swept under the rug. This makes me extremely uncomfortable; it’s like seeing a fox in the henhouse but the farmers are all looking the other way and no one can convince them to admit they can see it and root it out. I really don’t know what to do being just a user; I feel like even if I tried to chime in on the mailing list I would just be ignored like the others trying to raise the alarm. I hope, as they do, that this is being discussed internally, away from the public list, and that a positive outcome is near. Maybe they are waiting for the 7.9 release before setting anything in stone. Or maybe the “AI” disease has infected one of the last pure operating system projects we have left and there’s no going back. Morgan on Fedi I obviously share Morgan’s concerns, and like him, I’m also afraid that opening the door to a few drops of slop in base will quickly grow into a torrent of slop as time goes by. Yes, it’s just a patch to tmux, but it’s in base, and the “base” of a BSD is almost a sacred concept, and entirely the last place where you want to see code that raises ethical, environmental, quality, and legal concerns. For all we know, this patch of slop or the next one contains a bunch of GPL code because it just so happens that’s where the ball tumbling down the developer’s pachinko machine ended up. GPL code that would then be in the base of a BSD. I echo the call for the OpenBSD project to address this problem, and to set clear boundaries and guidelines regarding “AI” code, so users and developers alike know what level of quality and integrity we can expect from OpenBSD and its base installation going forward.