# I am concerned about LLM code in Python **URL:** \ **Category:** Python Help\ **Created:** [March 26, 2026, 8:45am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/i-am-concerned-about-llm-code-in-python/106691 "2026-03-26T08:45:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 76
**Author:** ![tim.one](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/tim.one/32/282_2.png) [@tim.one](https://discuss.python.org/u/tim.one)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2026, 7:30pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/i-am-concerned-about-llm-code-in-python/106691/76 "2026-03-30T19:30:55Z")
> [@ell1e](#): > > Hence the suggestion to make a clear rule to indicate you want those humans to stop. Specifically those who think it may be allowed or even encouraged. > > (Sorry if I’m misunderstanding. But I feel like this human problem is why I made this thread, unless we’re missing each others’ points here.) Except I don’t want them to stop using AI to help them write code. I want _responsible_ use. AI is a new tool, but brings new potential benefits as well as new potential dangers. We already have a policy, which you’ve been pointed at several times. I would absolutely add text pointing out the dangers of plagiarism, which I don’t think our policy currently mentions. Probably because the author(s) thought it was “too obvious” to call out explicitly. But contributors come from many backgrounds and levels of experience, and “explicit is better than implicit”. > [@](#): > > No policy is 100% enforcable, I mentioned this above. But it shifts moral responsibility and often will reduce misbehavior. Or otherwise why even have e.g. any code of conduct? Other FOSS projects like e.g. Qemu felt like it was worth trying. The policy already points out ``` As with using any tool, the resulting contribution is the responsibility of the contributor ``` Nobody gets a free pass. But we’re focused on _outcomes_, not on the processes by which outcomes are obtained. I think that’s the right way to go. Of course you’re free to disagree. > [@](#): > > Sorry, perhaps I might bow out here since I’m repeating myself. I hope some of this was helpful. I’m grateful you raised the issue(s)! They’re real and important. I happen to be with those who believe “so ban it!” not only wouldn’t help, it would hurt, by driving those who do use bots to work at disguising the origins. I would instead encourage people who use bots in their submitted work to be very open and up-front about it. That won’t happen if it’s banned, or even stigmatized. A comment saying “The following function was mostly written by Claude AI” would be a high-value clue for more experienced reviewers to focus on potential license violations. WIthout such up-front disclosure, who would notice? Especially as AI improves, telltale signs of “AI slop” will diminish. My own favorite bot has learned my style so well that _I_ have a hard time looking at my own private code projects and remembering which parts were prototypes written by the bot and which by me. I haven’t yet contributed such code to any pubic repositories (well, apart from my own), but doing so is inevitable. When the time comes, I’ll give full credit to the bot(s) that materially helped with various parts. If a project rejects the code based on just that, well, that’s their decision to live with. I’ll move on to other projects with more nuanced policies. --- _[View the full topic](https://discuss.python.org/t/i-am-concerned-about-llm-code-in-python/106691)._