From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Delivery-date: Fri, 21 Nov 2025 15:25:57 -0800 Received: from mail-qt1-f189.google.com ([209.85.160.189]) by mail.fairlystable.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1vMaVm-0000xk-TU for bitcoindev@gnusha.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2025 15:25:57 -0800 Received: by mail-qt1-f189.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-4ed6ceab125sf75467141cf.1 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2025 15:25:54 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; t=1763767549; cv=pass; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605; b=C1Jqqkf8MgetDWYRypX80JUKeJrFCSlG5FLagwDzIepWOLs+o3Q0DfbHNrxU0HNySG VP1tv47c1D4UNVFBKm+OaZvHDkra+4SblGJrFb9TTb/V0PRrFVL3pgbzSOjLjbFhHzRq PZvHdXAICaM31npZrexrbpOE1IV+vGnxIGVlsjQKHLK9bAl64QYu+KnXlElxTfR6L21c ZhxK/wqHJtNJsgM/HvQi+6J74qaCHCgm+9weRSu0+eRYDSbR0MM0ckL6e9BkgEr3NHcf 0sR2czdtoEfjxC0Sum5HBPql9uhBywkDVY3OBllA3fRlhKfAsBEkGNxkKaA3s1bhMOW9 HM5Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:sender:dkim-signature :dkim-signature; bh=tnVz4rqxSRU4tlkiF5WQE3kPOhb/qm8G5fhCgQEM1Q8=; fh=NQNDGLkVQFSOQT5BMforc33E2dW5Lks4ks3u2HCAqqk=; b=JOq2HE5z7pQe/o0f8Oj88l6aaSKtI92uMYLc/ufxrx2bGBxeYxG2lMDla8hcewZ0Os 6nPGcr2Uo1VQAVz4LXE+fyL7N3PrVOCY2jMpoqvU9zFPNgkYiWKbwQcT2JlUCEWZk9/+ RNP3JYHI31HVc4s2KOjtE2Xn98diB1KyUM4yMdznSz+OSmmBC4ad0//cucf3Vikd1Ovo 3WPhgEAYUQqQ/KAx9k+zGzjN+zPnJ9taGko14E77KyzTt2B1we9oM5nlZl4okiUnEnv/ HahkMgRuOwH9VWluYJMK4sh/A0G9OxjC/46/bD88y2E77Kxq8JPOF7KW4wuzbsiqGpOm 9hyw==; darn=gnusha.org ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=hQ+rUgfz; spf=pass (google.com: domain of matbalez@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::f33 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=matbalez@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com; dara=pass header.i=@googlegroups.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20230601; t=1763767549; x=1764372349; darn=gnusha.org; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=tnVz4rqxSRU4tlkiF5WQE3kPOhb/qm8G5fhCgQEM1Q8=; b=f8k+fXcWqwuSOtOVmejlN1hAI1xF5GRBhxNQm0fvV2iYIzKLwSTH4/TlL7UdrgDPHt YiGRrXbAbjq2uL6938O3BjziZGz8SJB2v1SidZ17pibJjNtPR3VB8X8fSXMmlKlka5Hu VekbFItdP03e2uUsz2RfoAewAVvmheDH0kXgLC4ZJ65P3O2+9SfhAK1SUXREy4W+NnXZ q2uIS9EKOmjrInRPUbKaMu1kEQcpBL/4sx0eLOn8tRDAkk+lGal6I/QBkbdLtMH3uz2a 1B3FTrtvtSIDrQBSMnSPacY+tFM130VB6HNZNdcHOAhqIlz6yv5DV4EhmM7sJGWDxugy FplA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1763767549; x=1764372349; darn=gnusha.org; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=tnVz4rqxSRU4tlkiF5WQE3kPOhb/qm8G5fhCgQEM1Q8=; b=HzvsZwvh5qJSwgf7utbsEERsfMPunohROB+LgMrlJk9TqgHh7quPn7s5vNKc0V8ZCq gSc71jmkFSXCdcNdfJSIg5jYJFCvXaLRpH7fedn13AEHUCBfljYoOzFM0ks1FM4cFZy7 xSNX3fHXofdSqXQyJfcVbpFrK+2r2DuOxLlu9cD7IJatZ04+DALdNBHqGbVggJmxN2vn FpsJZwiASdsHg4qWaijvujwSkKae0yPsDrJaBKXavCV/FotcLiLyX48uhWfup+z/+nms VAM5Z9A0vbexCBuRArUpC+dbzjujstDgF5osjdVlNnREank+x0n1nTRzwIWZrjOH0peb k5XQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1763767549; x=1764372349; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:x-gm-gg:x-beenthere:x-gm-message-state :sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=tnVz4rqxSRU4tlkiF5WQE3kPOhb/qm8G5fhCgQEM1Q8=; b=ksW9yH0QGmeevHJd28InfKzLuDvDPUR2mfjyv6pPexhm0UYJL1kUcdgzpwzFHusmf7 be6vFQ9E2Zm4kMP6/BfXtIBCi4NY6jxQvFtTxjl5y1W8jxH2MlSfdC+wjnS86OrsR/Rs GbLf10/gqlD1dpoHm2w+GVDH89rwpeCTunCyLr/JxbsXuuH5U8P2QhnW/3nSQCmCX3E+ 8q220Amb23DoL3CKTLsI43wi6aJ19nq6ugsEG0czEH7EnUPlKPSVB5UPxGd75UlVxmgp dF8eNEfvsom2Zbch/qJQwi0YNi3MMcV9CsHOIPDrHyjAMbUOhKAqamft2Dnozf0YX8AY tl7g== Sender: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCVpdW16n/klAcC+oKwuwqI73py82ug6MfH9EGipfOBJRry7UO973JcaANwAKu9I/D1fq+758jxNjDcc@gnusha.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyqYvAS5YkigAqJ6bLf+gm78BgyhbcQzz1T4w/V0nZoF5vWGvjy Wc31qNbZ+OTGLZG6Mn5Kbr8ix4ZbUYBo6IMW/KAZa2YBJFra230N7plP X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE5k9YGgECVOJmy6sFGQS8ycmdma9eQ7qla163Oek3bgGSdu0HYP8efdeth5CjneqCLnIJvQA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:190f:b0:4ee:fe8:9348 with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-4ee5890e8d6mr59211221cf.72.1763767548514; Fri, 21 Nov 2025 15:25:48 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; h="Ae8XA+bEYIcvRHX0aanc2460eJ3vX7Uw7u5ixHhzccQlQtO7Rw==" Received: by 2002:a05:622a:45:b0:4ee:4220:d0b4 with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-4ee492484efls56196441cf.1.-pod-prod-02-us; Fri, 21 Nov 2025 15:25:43 -0800 (PST) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCUqGY+0xafXfvKCjlhsfuxygiVJtxtTTZdVjMw7pZ8itr59N5theTRsBFQAWjdlJ3lGPV9OJYvYzMDX@googlegroups.com X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:40d4:b0:8b2:63ed:dd10 with SMTP id af79cd13be357-8b33d4aec02mr549748785a.78.1763767543369; Fri, 21 Nov 2025 15:25:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by 2002:a05:6808:8982:10b0:450:d4ca:2ed2 with SMTP id 5614622812f47-451112ddad6msb6e; Thu, 20 Nov 2025 12:14:21 -0800 (PST) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCUOWt0T4XhUWvYKNglxVHbn99isUXWVnDqBzwJxqZJFtZhDZjYk4vTyZRCqadMwqRXSH08mm4FzJAcQ@googlegroups.com X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:260c:b0:433:6f5d:49bf with SMTP id e9e14a558f8ab-435b82bd7eamr5166165ab.30.1763669661310; Thu, 20 Nov 2025 12:14:21 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1763669661; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605; b=XOdllqcpwBWwva5vb0JivjaRVHUyLy62ctX1q2APOyyu4TipClvGORKwjX+kp7zdmt dn2EV86zfxsjlD/0YZYDa/nyTSBolfmrHlrOaBIRpDlcnMuahGNKY3fNlP86fgp3s0/A iFqC9VJXVOlzGQXFNzb/ocrVczfb+piFQUH/cjXmXP7sUbejYLlhXtLtCgjH0JpWtP5M mLAgtyyt0EQOYm+CegeQ7B0nVT9x3+mF51g5GdFskuKbTQiVGVnvy/jG4IxcVxd3IJnz 1D2sqWjFFIdyka/bzzjOYcXl0fxCAN/Me+gLOPq2U8Nxquk5AXFTFX82LIlebPNNRiwE ALNQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=gLClcMGWV7iDJMzDUGdLylqAdNrNzKCTHnuNhbhbrB4=; fh=Rg+tTvICR5j4WSXgfzze0SeuifBx3RKfMTzQVgazGQM=; b=VBweoNL870yerlsnku4vFr/hbrH9R9QtZRwC95i2IUKYsVfhMFPUKR4D5+bLPoI8hM IS6hDwHhw1oC5hlB09DpkXcEMOsXo1GwLykcaE/uyMCIATphEmpurCWrpbsEaZwuFfEs YO+fRBXXhQIa++FvGK4oo9jGfpHrguFJKN3nmyznINWGIqKb6obEep+BgI7PDT5BScEA 2a75F+8iDCsYSj3+c8h++Y85Z3ACpD/UlfV+5ELetBFTQb4dq0D+wzxQsZNSElsXAORA HDZiu5nb+Es5McS6p9GqA9ZdH90569zbDREGYxNIGHkZ2nXNsWYEFbBezX8RNIa5gONR LBRg==; dara=google.com ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=hQ+rUgfz; spf=pass (google.com: domain of matbalez@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::f33 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=matbalez@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com; dara=pass header.i=@googlegroups.com Received: from mail-qv1-xf33.google.com (mail-qv1-xf33.google.com. [2607:f8b0:4864:20::f33]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e9e14a558f8ab-435a90c3165si1109975ab.8.2025.11.20.12.14.21 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 20 Nov 2025 12:14:21 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of matbalez@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::f33 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::f33; Received: by mail-qv1-xf33.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-8823d5127daso13004976d6.0 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2025 12:14:21 -0800 (PST) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVEeuV+Tsle0VJyPClZ1/Gu21Execag698MbMnVZgTBEze8dcgyoKwy1LQuf2n/PL77hWXdDpnBMO0X@googlegroups.com X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvvHaefmfJ1zppRiiZVhXltTAGyPGC3n84eQ6bQYlJer1FcrBmYOQe4NQfaGhg ws/AzNs0vg6edN9zvc27Rp8x3Llz//iqabA3vChF1wF25ZpAEJdaFJE5j3iWs1aqYRnXMLbWouZ T5eOXk3hHRmzv5o7pskkSLlqzLYDM2wSWtWTuXXf153Pzod6kcc8iV8oLjsN0QF6d5lrNX1tt6R Tdm6jCnCQ7XI7OAHm18Ilt/SZ01c+lfZML61+Lji8fbBTfASAu4bByKi30T50exFj6JmPveieRm l4NUU5wrshAbSKSbsJC0i5COAuiX4Q== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:2486:b0:880:4dd2:1d0b with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-8847a4a13cdmr14687766d6.58.1763669660478; Thu, 20 Nov 2025 12:14:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <205b3532-ccc1-4b2f-964f-264fc6e0e70b@murch.one> <3a66dbbe9a9c46566c8a9a16ccb1cc91@dtrt.org> <012c719c-0f56-474d-8851-a2db3a0b422cn@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: From: Mat Balez Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2025 12:14:09 -0800 X-Gm-Features: AWmQ_bn0y4te9-ArlnoDfOfDVw-z66PkRjiX_B7Dlqh6QlH8rlEgaZBL6xHiRY4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [bitcoindev] Motion to Activate BIP 3 To: Oghenovo Usiwoma Cc: Bitcoin Mechanic , Bitcoin Development Mailing List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009d2fcf06440c575f" X-Original-Sender: matbalez@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=hQ+rUgfz; spf=pass (google.com: domain of matbalez@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::f33 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=matbalez@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com; dara=pass header.i=@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; contact bitcoindev+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 786775582512 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) --0000000000009d2fcf06440c575f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable More and more of writing by all humans, including BIP proposers, will inevitably involve AI in some more or less significant way. I don't expect people to reliably express the degree to which AI was used to inform the thinking behind the BIP, or the writing itself. I'm not aware of any common standard we would use to express those things. Adversarially, we have to assume people won't do it if it's not in their interests. Rather, I think the expectation should be that BIP proposers are entirely responsible for submitting high quality BIPs and they take ownership for what they are submitting (submitting garbage burns your rep, always has and always will). BIP reviewers should simply assume for all BIPs that AI was likely used significantly to create them, and judge BIPs only on the merit of the ideas and content. Because of the advent of LLMs (and their inevitable continued improvement) this will almost certainly result in an increased number of BIPs being advanced, many of low (slop-filled) quality but also, hopefully, more high quality ones as well=E2=80=94proposals that might not otherwise have seen t= he light of day and/or proposals themselves being strengthened with better arguments, ideas and language. The solution to such a rise in volume IMO is that BIP reviewers should also equip themselves with LLMs and other AI-powered tools to help filter/triage/assess BIPs to get a handle on the rise in noise level. Yet, just like BIP proposers, the onus should be on BIP reviewers to take ownership for the quality of the decision-making around BIP quality and that it not ever be entirely automated but retain "human in the loop" judgment=E2=80=94at least for the foreseeable future=E2=80=94just made more= efficient and effective through the use of AI. On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 1:47=E2=80=AFAM Oghenovo Usiwoma wrote: > > I think it makes sense to request that submissions should state if - an= d > to what degree - AI has been used. It's reasonable to expect fewer eyebal= ls > on AI generated submissions as they're so easily generated and their > potential for wasting reviewer time is high. > > In my humble opinion, I believe that humans will continue to use the > easiest method available to them to achieve their goals. If we agree that > humans will do this, then there will be a lot of AI-assited content. If I > did write an AI-assited BIP draft, why would I add this "AI-label" to my > BIP when I know that it will cause reviewers to ignore it? > > On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 3:18=E2=80=AFAM Bitcoin Mechanic < > bitcoinmechanic@ocean.xyz> wrote: > >> I think it makes sense to request that submissions should state if - and >> to what degree - AI has been used. It's reasonable to expect fewer eyeba= lls >> on AI generated submissions as they're so easily generated and their >> potential for wasting reviewer time is high. >> >> If people are submitting AI generated code and lying about it than that >> obviously undermines what it is they're proposing so they're naturally >> disincentivized to do so, thus the honour system should be relatively >> effective. >> >> I think most people have begun using it for making outlines and tweaking >> from there. The time saved is too significant for many to resist, and >> declaring that it was used for an initial outline shouldn't be too >> dissuasive for any reviewers. >> >> The deeper discussion around legal implications and generally about AI >> code quality is not resolvable here, it's a massive topic with deep >> philosophical implications that go way outside the scope of BIP 3 imo. >> >> Thanks >> >> On Wednesday, November 19, 2025 at 2:40:55=E2=80=AFPM UTC-8 Bitcoin Erro= r Log >> wrote: >> >>> A few years ago, I had this idea that bitcoin divisibility needed to be >>> fixed as a misconception. I put it (proto-bip177) in our bitcoin wallet >>> app, promoted the idea where I could. It worked great, but only our use= rs >>> knew. >>> >>> And then AI became good enough to use for some things. AI has been a >>> HUGE unlock for me and my learning and creating style. Early this year,= I >>> told my AI, filled with context about the upcoming BIP3 standard, and >>> examples of related BIPs, to make a BIP for me that properly expressed = all >>> of the nuances of my idea on how to handle removal of decimals in a UX. >>> >>> It looked pretty good, but AI wasn't as good as it is today, and the >>> formatting was total slop. Thankfully, most of the BIP reviewers are >>> actually amazing people, and I was able to contact them directly and as= k >>> for help, because I'm not an actual developer (yet). After some private >>> help, it was good enough for the mailing list, and a real draft. >>> >>> BIP 177 is a very simple BIP compared to most, and I'd probably make it >>> better if I started today, but ... it exists! It might be the first/onl= y >>> (?) vibe-BIP, and, as of last week, due to Cashapp and Square support, = it's >>> possible that BIP 177 is now in more people's hands than not. >>> >>> Today, I now have several private drafts of BIPs I am working on with >>> AI, I am trying to impose less slop on my peers as I work in private. T= hese >>> newer BIPs are increasingly technical, and I have also started vibe-cod= ing >>> implementations to test them, and I continue growing into an engineer. >>> >>> Now the BIP repo is my favorite part of Bitcoin and interacting with >>> Bitcoin Core. I feel sincere gratitude to three BIP reviewers specifica= lly >>> for humoring my sincere, yet not matured, effort and desire to improve >>> Bitcoin without changing consensus code. >>> >>> My vision for the BIP repo and reviewers, and AI, is much different tha= n >>> yours. It is part of the story that brought me closer to Bitcoin >>> development, and deep respect to my superiors for tolerating me while I >>> was/am fledgling. >>> >>> Please don't add more weird subjective, exclusive barriers just because >>> AI is warping reality. Deal with it, and please, please, continue makin= g an >>> effort to not only guard the BIP repo, but ensure it remains a fertile >>> ground where Bitcoin Core maintains an attitude of being great stewards= to >>> the people, not only the specs. >>> >>> After all, we will need people to replace you some day, and those peopl= e >>> need role models too. >>> >>> ~John Carvalho >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 1:18=E2=80=AFAM Greg Maxwell wrote: >>> >>>> No doubt *you* are able to make good documents with or without the aid >>>> of AI. >>>> >>>> With outright AI 'authorship' you immediately run into potential >>>> copyright issues-- which I think is the origin of the "generated by" >>>> prohibition, otherwise I think disclosure would be sufficient. >>>> >>>> Taking a step back: is Bitcoin's welfare maximized by permitting LLM >>>> glurge submissions in standards documents? In some cases it's benign, = I >>>> readily agree, in others its harmful. But the number of good submissi= ons >>>> that could be made would hardly be increased by LLMs (being limited by >>>> expert proposers with good ideas) but the number of potential poor >>>> submissions is increased astronomically. So I think it's pretty clear= ly a >>>> net harm to have text authored that way. >>>> >>>> I've never had an impression that drafting was at all a limiting step >>>> in writing BIPs, though even to the extent that it has been at times i= t's >>>> possible to use LLMs in a review capacity to make authorship much easi= er >>>> ("What's missing / unclear?") without resorting to using it to author. >>>> >>>> There is a particularly clear pattern at least with current LLM tools >>>> that users who lack the skills to have authored the work without an LL= M are >>>> generally unable to recognize when the LLM is full of crap (and even >>>> sometimes when they should know better), so unfortunately they're only >>>> benign to use in the hands of those whose need is the least. >>>> >>>> And as a reviewer outside of Bitcoin I've found LLM powered proposers >>>> to be absolutely the worst to deal with. Because they're not submittin= g >>>> their own words and ideas, they're unable to change their thinking in >>>> response or explain sufficiently to change yours--- the interactions o= ften >>>> degrade to them just copy and pasting their chatbot back to you. Beca= use >>>> it's cheap to generate more text they also tend to flood you out with >>>> documents several times longer than any human author would have bother= ed >>>> with. >>>> >>>> I think LLMs have generally created something of an existential threat >>>> to most open collaborations: Now its so easy to get flooded out by sub= tly >>>> worthless material. Many projects, including, Bitcoin have long strug= gled >>>> with review capacity being limited and a far amount of time waste by >>>> thoughtless (or even crazy!) submissions, but now it's automated and e= ven >>>> the most well meaning person may now make submissions that are as bad = as >>>> the most deviously constructed malicious submissions could have been i= n the >>>> past, not even know they are doing it, and can make a dozen proposals >>>> before lunch without even breaking a sweat. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 12:06=E2=80=AFAM David A. Harding >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 2025-11-04 15:10, Murch wrote: >>>>> > Summary of changes since BIP=E2=80=AF3 was advanced to Proposed: >>>>> > [...] >>>>> > - that BIPs submissions may not be generated by AI/LLM=E2=81=B5 >>>>> > [...] >>>>> > =E2=81=B5 https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/2006 >>>>> >>>>> I strongly disagree with this change. If I were to begin working on = a >>>>> new BIP today, I would use AI throughout the process. I'd ask it to >>>>> help me create a todo list of what should go in the BIP; I'd ask it t= o >>>>> create a draft based on existing BIPs, my todo list, and whatever >>>>> other >>>>> work products I had (e.g. prototypes); I'd then ask it to help me >>>>> refine >>>>> the document until I was satisfied. >>>>> >>>>> I would, of course, review every word of the draft BIP before >>>>> submitting >>>>> it for consideration and ensure that it represented the highest >>>>> quality >>>>> work I was able to produce---but the ultimate work would be a mix of >>>>> AI >>>>> and human writing and editing. >>>>> >>>>> I think considerate use of AI would be even more valuable for people >>>>> who >>>>> are less comfortable with writing technical English-language document= s >>>>> than I am. For example, non-native literates, people with >>>>> disabilities >>>>> that make text input difficulty, and those who recognize that they're >>>>> bad writers. >>>>> >>>>> The PR forbidding AI doesn't go into any detail about its motivation, >>>>> although it references a previous discussion[1] where a low-quality >>>>> BIP >>>>> PR was opened using mostly AI-generated content. I'm guessing the >>>>> motivation is that AI (by itself) generates low-quality technical >>>>> content, BIPs should be high-quality technical content, and therefore >>>>> we >>>>> should ban the use of AI. >>>>> >>>>> However, as mentioned in the previous discussion, the BIP process >>>>> already requires high-quality content.[2] AI-generated content can b= e >>>>> high-quality, especially if its creation and editing was guided by a >>>>> knowledgeable human. Banning specific tools like AI seems redundant >>>>> and >>>>> penalizes people who either need those tools or who can use them >>>>> effectively. >>>>> >>>>> I advocate for reverting the first hunk of BIPs repository PR 2006. >>>>> >>>>> -Dave >>>>> >>>>> [1] https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/2005 >>>>> [2] "After fleshing out the proposal further and ensuring that it is >>>>> of >>>>> **high quality** and properly formatted, the authors should open a >>>>> pull >>>>> request to the BIPs repository." --BIP3, emphasis added >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, sen= d >>>>> an email to bitcoindev+...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To view this discussion visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/3a66dbbe9a9c46566c8a9a16= ccb1cc91%40dtrt.org >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to bitcoindev+...@googlegroups.com. >>>> >>> To view this discussion visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAAS2fgRV1aZ9xvAhBriZ%3DX= dmYf5CvrvXWXsjVD07uynivW_qkg%40mail.gmail.com >>>> >>>> . >>>> >>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group= s >> "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send a= n >> email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/012c719c-0f56-474d-8851-a2d= b3a0b422cn%40googlegroups.com >> >> . >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAOCjZ9TLtsyjXTdonWK-zUj-V%3= DHtFnDeb92D_W%2BVPV6TCg%3Donw%40mail.gmail.com > > . > --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/= CABd6%3DMPtx9rN2ZtTz7CbT-zb-3qVUecZZrmb56aFyCSVeLxsEQ%40mail.gmail.com. --0000000000009d2fcf06440c575f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
More and more of writing by all humans, including BIP prop= osers, will inevitably involve AI in some more or less significant way. I d= on't expect people to reliably express the degree to which AI was used = to inform the thinking behind the BIP, or the writing itself. I'm not a= ware of any common standard we would use to express those things. Adversari= ally, we have to assume people won't do it if it's not in their=C2= =A0interests.=C2=A0

Rather, I think the expectation shou= ld be that BIP proposers are entirely responsible for submitting high quali= ty BIPs and they take ownership for what they=C2=A0are submitting (submitti= ng garbage burns your rep, always has and always will). BIP reviewers shoul= d simply assume for all BIPs that AI was likely used significantly to creat= e them, and judge BIPs only on the merit of the ideas and content.=C2=A0

Because of the advent of LLMs (and their inevitable = continued improvement) this will almost certainly result in an increased nu= mber of BIPs being advanced, many of low (slop-filled) quality but also, ho= pefully, more high quality ones as well=E2=80=94proposals that might not ot= herwise have seen the light of day and/or proposals themselves being streng= thened with better arguments, ideas and language.=C2=A0

The solution to such a rise in volume IMO is that BIP reviewers shoul= d also equip themselves with LLMs and other AI-powered tools to help filter= /triage/assess BIPs to get a handle on the rise in noise level. Yet, just l= ike BIP proposers, the onus should be on BIP reviewers to take ownership fo= r the quality of the decision-making around BIP quality and that it not eve= r be entirely automated but retain "human in the loop" judgment= =E2=80=94at least for the foreseeable future=E2=80=94just made more efficie= nt and effective through the use of AI.=C2=A0

On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at = 1:47=E2=80=AFAM Oghenovo Usiwoma <eunovo9@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think it makes se= nse to request that submissions should state if - and to what degree - AI h= as been used. It's reasonable to expect fewer eyeballs on AI generated = submissions as they're so easily generated and their potential for wast= ing reviewer time is high.

In my humble opinion, I believe that huma= ns will continue to use the easiest method available=C2=A0to them to achiev= e their goals. If we agree that humans will do this, then there will be a l= ot of AI-assited content. If I did write an AI-assited=C2=A0BIP draft, why = would I add this "AI-label" to my BIP when I know that it will ca= use reviewers to ignore it?

On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 3:18=E2=80=AFAM Bitc= oin Mechanic <bitcoinmechanic@ocean.xyz> wrote:
I think it makes sense to request that submis= sions should state if - and to what degree - AI has been used. It's rea= sonable to expect fewer eyeballs on AI generated submissions as they're= so easily generated and their potential for wasting reviewer time is high.=

If people are submitting AI generated code and lying ab= out it than that obviously undermines what it is they're proposing so t= hey're naturally disincentivized to do so, thus the honour system shoul= d be relatively effective.

I think most people hav= e begun using it for making outlines and tweaking from there. The time save= d is too significant for many to resist, and declaring that it was used for= an initial outline shouldn't be too dissuasive for any reviewers.

The deeper discussion around legal implications and ge= nerally about AI code quality is not resolvable here, it's a massive to= pic with deep philosophical implications that go way outside the scope of B= IP 3 imo.

Thanks

On Wednesday, November 19, 20= 25 at 2:40:55=E2=80=AFPM UTC-8 Bitcoin Error Log wrote:
A few years a= go, I had this idea that bitcoin divisibility needed to be fixed as a misco= nception. I put it (proto-bip177) in our bitcoin wallet app, promoted the i= dea where I could. It worked great, but only our users knew.

=
And then AI became good enough to use for some things. AI has be= en a HUGE unlock for me and my learning and creating style. Early this year= , I told my AI, filled with context about the upcoming BIP3 standard, and e= xamples of related BIPs, to make a BIP for me that properly expressed all o= f the nuances of my idea on how to handle removal of decimals in a UX.

It looked pretty good, but AI wasn't as good as it= is today, and the formatting was total slop. Thankfully, most of the BIP r= eviewers are actually amazing people, and I was able to contact them direct= ly and ask for help, because I'm not an actual developer (yet). After s= ome private help, it was good enough for the mailing list, and a real draft= .=C2=A0

BIP 177 is a very simple BIP compared to m= ost, and I'd probably make it better if I started today, but ... it exi= sts! It might be the first/only (?) vibe-BIP, and, as of last week, due to = Cashapp and Square support, it's possible that BIP 177 is now in more p= eople's hands than not.=C2=A0

Today, I now hav= e several private drafts of BIPs I am working on with AI, I am trying to im= pose less slop on my peers as I work in private. These newer BIPs are incre= asingly technical, and I have also started vibe-coding implementations to t= est them, and I continue growing into an engineer.=C2=A0

Now the BIP repo is my favorite part of Bitcoin and interacting with= Bitcoin Core. I feel sincere gratitude to three BIP reviewers specifically= for humoring my sincere, yet not matured, effort and desire to improve Bit= coin without changing consensus code.

My vision fo= r the BIP repo and reviewers, and AI, is much different than yours. It is p= art of the story that brought me closer to Bitcoin development, and deep re= spect to my superiors for tolerating me while I was/am fledgling.=C2=A0

Please don't add more weird subjective, exclusive= barriers just because AI is warping reality. Deal with it, and please, ple= ase, continue making an effort to not only guard the BIP repo, but ensure i= t remains a fertile ground where Bitcoin Core maintains an attitude of bein= g great stewards to the people, not only the specs.=C2=A0

After all, we will need people to replace you some day, and those p= eople need role models too.

~John Carvalho

<= /div>
On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 1:18=E2=80=AFAM Gre= g Maxwell <gmax...@gmail.com> wrote:
No doubt *you* are able to make good docum= ents with or without the aid of AI.

With outright = AI 'authorship' you immediately run into potential=20 copyright issues-- which I think is the origin of the "generated by&qu= ot;=20 prohibition, otherwise I think disclosure would be sufficient.
Taking a step back: is Bitcoin's welfare=C2=A0maximized by= permitting LLM glurge submissions in standards documents? In some cases it= 's benign, I readily agree, in others its harmful.=C2=A0 But the number= of good submissions that could be made would hardly be increased by LLMs (= being limited by expert proposers with good ideas) but the number of potent= ial poor submissions is increased astronomically.=C2=A0 So I think it's= pretty clearly a net harm to have text authored that way.

I've never had an impression that drafting was at all a limiti= ng step in writing BIPs, though even to the extent that it has been at time= s it's possible to use LLMs in a review capacity to make authorship muc= h easier ("What's missing / unclear?") without resorting to u= sing it to author.

There is a particularly clear pattern at l= east with current LLM tools that users who lack the skills to have authored= the work without an LLM are generally unable to recognize when the LLM is = full of crap (and even sometimes when they should know better), so unfortun= ately they're only benign to use in the hands of those whose need is th= e least.=C2=A0=C2=A0

And as a reviewer outside of = Bitcoin I've found LLM powered proposers to be absolutely the worst to = deal with. Because they're not submitting their own words and ideas, th= ey're unable to change their thinking in response or explain sufficient= ly to change yours--- the interactions often degrade to them just copy and = pasting their chatbot back to you.=C2=A0 Because it's cheap to generate= more text they also tend to flood you out with documents several times lon= ger than any human author would have bothered with.

I think LLMs have generally created something of an existential threat to= most open collaborations: Now its=C2=A0so easy to get flooded out by subtl= y worthless material.=C2=A0 Many projects, including, Bitcoin have long str= uggled with review capacity being limited and a far amount of time waste by= thoughtless (or even crazy!) submissions, but now it's automated and e= ven the most well meaning person may now make submissions that are as bad a= s the most deviously constructed malicious submissions could have been in t= he past, not even know they are doing it, and can make a dozen proposals be= fore lunch without even breaking a sweat.



On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 12:06=E2=80=AFAM David A. Harding <da...@dtrt.org> wrote:
On 2025-11-04 15:10, Murch wrote:
> Summary of changes since BIP=E2=80=AF3 was advanced to Proposed:
> [...]
> =C2=A0 - that BIPs submissions may not be generated by AI/LLM=E2=81=B5=
> [...]
> =E2=81=B5 https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pul= l/2006

I strongly disagree with this change.=C2=A0 If I were to begin working on a=
new BIP today, I would use AI throughout the process.=C2=A0 I'd ask it = to
help me create a todo list of what should go in the BIP; I'd ask it to =
create a draft based on existing BIPs, my todo list, and whatever other work products I had (e.g. prototypes); I'd then ask it to help me refin= e
the document until I was satisfied.

I would, of course, review every word of the draft BIP before submitting it for consideration and ensure that it represented the highest quality work I was able to produce---but the ultimate work would be a mix of AI and human writing and editing.

I think considerate use of AI would be even more valuable for people who are less comfortable with writing technical English-language documents
than I am.=C2=A0 For example, non-native literates, people with disabilitie= s
that make text input difficulty, and those who recognize that they're <= br> bad writers.

The PR forbidding AI doesn't go into any detail about its motivation, <= br> although it references a previous discussion[1] where a low-quality BIP PR was opened using mostly AI-generated content.=C2=A0 I'm guessing the=
motivation is that AI (by itself) generates low-quality technical
content, BIPs should be high-quality technical content, and therefore we should ban the use of AI.

However, as mentioned in the previous discussion, the BIP process
already requires high-quality content.[2]=C2=A0 AI-generated content can be=
high-quality, especially if its creation and editing was guided by a
knowledgeable human.=C2=A0 Banning specific tools like AI seems redundant a= nd
penalizes people who either need those tools or who can use them
effectively.

I advocate for reverting the first hunk of BIPs repository PR 2006.

-Dave

[1] https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/2005<= br> [2] "After fleshing out the proposal further and ensuring that it is o= f
**high quality** and properly formatted, the authors should open a pull request to the BIPs repository." --BIP3, emphasis added

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bitcoindev+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/3a6= 6dbbe9a9c46566c8a9a16ccb1cc91%40dtrt.org.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bitcoindev+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAAS2fgRV1aZ9xvAhB= riZ%3DXdmYf5CvrvXWXsjVD07uynivW_qkg%40mail.gmail.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.googl= e.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/012c719c-0f56-474d-8851-a2db3a0b422cn%40googlegrou= ps.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit ht= tps://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAOCjZ9TLtsyjXTdonWK-zUj-V%3DHtF= nDeb92D_W%2BVPV6TCg%3Donw%40mail.gmail.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bitcoind= ev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/= msgid/bitcoindev/CABd6%3DMPtx9rN2ZtTz7CbT-zb-3qVUecZZrmb56aFyCSVeLxsEQ%40ma= il.gmail.com.
--0000000000009d2fcf06440c575f--