From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Delivery-date: Thu, 20 Nov 2025 01:47:54 -0800 Received: from mail-oi1-f191.google.com ([209.85.167.191]) by mail.fairlystable.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1vM1Ga-0004jg-MF for bitcoindev@gnusha.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2025 01:47:54 -0800 Received: by mail-oi1-f191.google.com with SMTP id 5614622812f47-4510650aea0sf549852b6e.3 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2025 01:47:52 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; t=1763632066; cv=pass; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605; b=S6YNKQWf6koXqKE6OitBp/nBquwpbBR7DQ8YqOr3Mq6I34HcIrmBvr69mc6HP96GGV NyPkHOy4v46fFGAwQcdvjhaHV9eQgy4z+V0P4TP0MJO9NZlbCGIYDWMjOvd7mIUpf/JL fGfloiL0X2oRx6ppyrMByRL1/JWKIY9uGgnB0G5B9D8aAp67pfGFq1Q7h64N9wqez+8y Ts1Z2rhMd3+dOVQPMYO1tzNuJe6ecnkL1S0fyRBAGzDjP83nhJJp/aKEWwi2Gpav6qMh U9D8XqkC0o63rgCedCPtQPznHeDzNyGg6uNizUlZRiMo+ii8vEBLRqhMPl5h4ZMquptU 4UOA== 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=tb+c502xEmjQqPTq7eFfVQ5tg9W10OsiC+tGqN4+tow=; fh=xfF3DQlIckwl5J2anBHuSovu818sT/WPz+Ebt/rxbEQ=; b=ZP7HKxrHFN2NuEPx4ddwHEz48t6Z/qJjOTjWCAxk5CGLu+fKq5shA+yqNcjAxolpvd eRRueScgPM42MFHzLpyjN1Dp6wXixHGVME1TJwhnfap7qugIDqgo5HsNGkzksnXY3q4G lC3YRXVEE9b8pytQup1a54vRxcOkJzUdtKyqWScjVE00NRRPvXAoa9AMHw7CavpyX2yj LZ1yB1M+YwDDfdBsCr08hi5rT91t/qZo6CRLGnn3VeJxz06BqRa+Zc1j4nlNnfr4OO8r pq+A4CfNVpM6irsnZg1HR7w+8G3UQZEm6YmKz3Hc30Q8HoSCCgs4/lAmLQ5cgl/zUJBf VLTA==; darn=gnusha.org ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b="int+EL/U"; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eunovo9@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::a2d as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=eunovo9@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=1763632066; x=1764236866; 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=tb+c502xEmjQqPTq7eFfVQ5tg9W10OsiC+tGqN4+tow=; b=A23SEJUgzsdQkc7SChd+bpFyxt1qwyeX9VVcks8EnvzwA4+59qeRdLdRy2mhoc71Ea mmd6Yc+B2+QE8G0qjsufIn/42TgTjKQHKtDz8b+WRq5lrFXon2AB5Ob7RO7Mp7uFNzPG QTOeLHZzVFF+b9uKg/wHwk1NPCAIu5K8M5OJ0wepOIOFkkPHObH4KFX1OTz16n9qkGtI eYUTOm56hkYfuvdJKyRz1LZIsRG4exJu+xoFWos4T/OFAKkGgg+J5908JLth2FEwdVcX Li8uMfWCN/at4pZ0KWQFGhkJXK/nF6tuzaiCDkTEvIkTH5OA4qfZiUk2RP99VLYokfzR MYww== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1763632066; x=1764236866; 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=tb+c502xEmjQqPTq7eFfVQ5tg9W10OsiC+tGqN4+tow=; b=eLJmNEf9LiQNm9apO/d7hnitV/BjBA1PfnQIB2OYq8IznuV9CCtTWSvk4aUh46GGem wouK/ZxAtq30oxKt3Kp0CCdjrf+aOZ2uPz6+/71SaDjsmPW19JzFBIwtDa5hw9cv0vf+ Wj+WugWwrhry4mEhw041NYJwKwmou9OBd4xeZ23KXz8uBCuve8Pf+MFks1ESUeIQGHB1 QBm0w5au1EmqidlEZ6zsrbzkyvTcXyUwTjBVfLPQBsTa8vnZ1EDvNHhFjWV2VJQSvE2Q V/Q5O4OFvNV70MEMgNYOWqHItyMNrkY0WrkglGCmf6F6befCI3yCLoR8scgY5tXDZ1zs 5C/w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1763632066; x=1764236866; 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=tb+c502xEmjQqPTq7eFfVQ5tg9W10OsiC+tGqN4+tow=; b=qJ2d963/B/j2ZG8gA9MXOV0T6PBN0l8aFljtaSkHWAOuWf6kv8eynPMEF1zaIHIwWH ZwFkdUxzTUNzVHpuRAR2E+wT9PHZdhbUdu6n08Ok3P/ehpNuFyo9yYl2cgF7TBELHFJM vIQ66o6vwIBVwcRhq7a70v/P1ivVdMelmXo1kcq5Aw+S4G2tTMNIBCl5F6S+G6k++2qi xzGkBdqwMlt5bQZL0y9nJ5Ci+S1hi589/gs3bxiTh7KPaqdtUk7C4fc5fa5GQOIIPWwc 8g+TAkH6313gn0gX2A6frUg2g+g6mN7EKXQ6Y6r/Ucx0epvRmfhdGTiDIax0AQnOt5jk SYmQ== Sender: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCXg+4I33LouvoZVLAJm4K4VEpHTJRlJaYVw4Xh0VEWFJNt1eZzKklaqE1DIbqkWNda2i7aEZEQTzgRo@gnusha.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzgGh9DhAkDnAN+wsaWUg2AgeM5dcRXBZ3aHIK9hW+zcwqsXHZZ LGpcPIfY+Q7tWf8HeskKC/FsAozeo9DjMrYzlwc00px0ed2EBC6DNN57 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF2o04F9hGUon7StoIAD9Vx1s1iKLeH4bpuLic82imtVIAIlitumkPrS/wsIWVYY4WF7kCqqQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:1b27:b0:450:36ba:f53d with SMTP id 5614622812f47-450ff24f54emr1304609b6e.22.1763632065922; Thu, 20 Nov 2025 01:47:45 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; h="Ae8XA+bJT/UXhPMnynxXQMLsuvvLjuL+Vm8RYgn2UYuG2y0Ceg==" Received: by 2002:a05:6820:c095:b0:656:d601:dbc7 with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-657837e8282ls201617eaf.0.-pod-prod-05-us; Thu, 20 Nov 2025 01:47:41 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:2f0d:b0:450:a9d0:b799 with SMTP id 5614622812f47-450ff222f43mr1399367b6e.17.1763632061766; Thu, 20 Nov 2025 01:47:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 2002:a05:620a:841:b0:8b2:e00e:5a07 with SMTP id af79cd13be357-8b32b207d83ms85a; Thu, 20 Nov 2025 01:06:15 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6122:46a9:b0:55b:305b:488e with SMTP id 71dfb90a1353d-55b7f2b9503mr723914e0c.20.1763629575053; Thu, 20 Nov 2025 01:06:15 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1763629575; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605; b=iEzvZgv5aetGV3YwLsQHalN9TYg0nfmCLZBwfJ6vVrUwX0xNW3/hycxHKJYyfra8pv vwArXitYyfqBJ6NTNt/6FUfqWEDBEjogohpLGekWjFQEyqB+UZISRNlSjty3lRY0MMfN y8/jadR+djc/wph2QWYm/5wVDM/Qbfv1gmnilUtitORxqbahk+VDgPGB9WSAc/rAwbgP tafiGGJCsHB+irmvSd+ICtKda5tkXeSiYWksnbSXV9Wrgmjp2g5+hD6fIVlnbXo86zMT NZzenjWZvwpfkBj9tCwcrn9uW8ELvKFsOAGrl+uddlQBuki4GVI3kBU9l7yqK1eY33v/ dSIw== 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=dDWW6lyTg/msdehAg/T9danQHWhPcTh9n46BdzzsZak=; fh=JPcaCvSZLfr+e03cvrKioS0vXlGG6JfSWKD8GXdC5C4=; b=eZsAbfsAw8KdIfOxjVzm2nkB0PoeUZx2UzGbEB275BOoM2Yw2lJsEhtZ/dIQ5vewUv j7Wc0HAwEI/YFniC+QQrJpJzD/UzCPAFrWdQ7Pt0qYR/BWJei8lrxJgJvVt/4f4vv2Ih CXRsuCPviZJUviDw1Q77zWFSrklJHP4c09hn+MgPNPQ3AHybMgvHPWdDPWe44SNHibTH ccZPTtCNwnu7TBDgTBK8rujCwhBDiaCaUg2McbJFPU6L90XUXcBoHY6i2aQcyI4DIx0i e94EuHuQp9llf3mNuJFgWRZVM0JaU4oLTuF+bU1pqO933vBMVFlym7Vc9V1nWZT5iakZ XvdA==; dara=google.com ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b="int+EL/U"; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eunovo9@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::a2d as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=eunovo9@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com; dara=pass header.i=@googlegroups.com Received: from mail-vk1-xa2d.google.com (mail-vk1-xa2d.google.com. [2607:f8b0:4864:20::a2d]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 71dfb90a1353d-55b7f6661b8si63707e0c.2.2025.11.20.01.06.15 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 20 Nov 2025 01:06:15 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eunovo9@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::a2d as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::a2d; Received: by mail-vk1-xa2d.google.com with SMTP id 71dfb90a1353d-55960aa131dso149332e0c.1 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2025 01:06:15 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvnyr7isUQ45iPf/4mpfw/1gz/P1VXsy4CjUzmEPBwE1BYPnFqlAHFRzc2Hybk sspX62ntxP6irKFFdA3OwhZTnjEkylKF5ZDrWLmFSxDaLe8AUyLVT5/1tKo/WgZ5Y1R8HGN0y1G m/WwCI8PjYgpnaDQqCmNqjZJOA67bZ9fo1Fn58QyaXgg47KMSxz+ON9uuXYjgPTNnHjWzhG/p6D 1kRtth1lnFUPKrVlvhonIJLPZHo/WPoTshgvxREmiksgznjQDFFuSFlwphoS/+r5H+f7+gf X-Received: by 2002:a67:e711:0:b0:5db:e721:8624 with SMTP id ada2fe7eead31-5e1bbbe08d4mr843662137.1.1763629574495; Thu, 20 Nov 2025 01:06:14 -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: <012c719c-0f56-474d-8851-a2db3a0b422cn@googlegroups.com> From: Oghenovo Usiwoma Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2025 10:06:02 +0100 X-Gm-Features: AWmQ_bkCAhOo7oXKGhgD3IyQJ_y1YKNk5x77pGB_qH95OZ0h49S9st9I-9W3EFA Message-ID: Subject: Re: [bitcoindev] Motion to Activate BIP 3 To: Bitcoin Mechanic Cc: Bitcoin Development Mailing List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004da38706440302bd" X-Original-Sender: eunovo9@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b="int+EL/U"; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eunovo9@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::a2d as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=eunovo9@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 (/) --0000000000004da38706440302bd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > 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 eyeballs 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 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 eyebal= ls > 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 Error= 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 user= s >> knew. >> >> And then AI became good enough to use for some things. AI has been a HUG= E >> unlock for me and my learning and creating style. Early this year, I tol= d >> my AI, filled with context about the upcoming BIP3 standard, and example= s >> 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 ask >> 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/only >> (?) vibe-BIP, and, as of last week, due to Cashapp and Square support, i= t'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. These >> newer BIPs are increasingly technical, and I have also started vibe-codi= ng >> 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 specifical= ly >> 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 than >> 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 making= 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 people >> 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 submissio= ns >>> 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 clearl= y a >>> net harm to have text authored that way. >>> >>> I've never had an impression that drafting was at all a limiting step i= n >>> writing BIPs, though even to the extent that it has been at times it's >>> possible to use LLMs in a review capacity to make authorship much easie= r >>> ("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 LLM= 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 t= o >>> be absolutely the worst to deal with. Because they're not submitting th= eir >>> own words and ideas, they're unable to change their thinking in respons= e or >>> explain sufficiently to change yours--- the interactions often degrade = to >>> them just copy and pasting their chatbot back to you. Because it's che= ap >>> to generate more text they also tend to flood you out with documents >>> several times longer 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 so easy to get flooded out by subt= ly >>> worthless material. Many projects, including, Bitcoin have long strugg= led >>> with review capacity being limited and a far amount of time waste by >>> thoughtless (or even crazy!) submissions, but now it's automated and ev= en >>> 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= 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 to >>>> create a draft based on existing BIPs, my todo list, and whatever othe= r >>>> 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 qualit= y >>>> work I was able to produce---but the ultimate work would be a mix of A= I >>>> 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. For example, non-native literates, people with disabilitie= s >>>> 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 BI= P >>>> 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 be >>>> 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 o= f >>>> **high quality** and properly formatted, the authors should open a pul= l >>>> 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, send >>>> an email to bitcoindev+...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To view this discussion visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/3a66dbbe9a9c46566c8a9a16c= cb1cc91%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%3DXd= mYf5CvrvXWXsjVD07uynivW_qkg%40mail.gmail.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/012c719c-0f56-474d-8851-a2db= 3a0b422cn%40googlegroups.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/= CAOCjZ9TLtsyjXTdonWK-zUj-V%3DHtFnDeb92D_W%2BVPV6TCg%3Donw%40mail.gmail.com. --0000000000004da38706440302bd Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> I think it makes sense to request that submissions sh= ould state if - and to what degree - AI has been used. It's reasonable = to expect fewer eyeballs on AI generated submissions as they're so easi= ly generated and their potential for wasting reviewer time is high.

= In my humble opinion, I believe that humans will continue to use the easies= t method available=C2=A0to them to achieve their goals. If we agree that hu= mans will do this, then there will be a lot of AI-assited content. If I did= write an AI-assited=C2=A0BIP draft, why would I add this "AI-label&qu= ot; 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 eyebal= ls 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 und= ermines what it is they're proposing so they're naturally disincent= ivized to do so, thus the honour system should be relatively effective.

I think most people have begun using it for making ou= tlines 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= 9;t be too dissuasive for any reviewers.

The deepe= r discussion around legal implications and generally about AI code quality = is not resolvable here, it's a massive topic with deep philosophical im= plications 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 Error Log wrote:
A few years ago, I had this idea that bitc= oin divisibility needed to be fixed as a misconception. I put it (proto-bip= 177) in our bitcoin wallet app, promoted the idea where I could. It worked = great, but only our users knew.

And then AI became= good enough to use for some things. AI has been a HUGE unlock for me and m= y learning and creating style. Early this year, I told my AI, filled with c= ontext about the upcoming BIP3 standard, and examples of related BIPs, to m= ake a BIP for me that properly expressed all of the nuances of my idea on h= ow to handle removal of decimals in a UX.

It looke= d 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 ask 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.=C2=A0

<= div>BIP 177 is a very simple BIP compared to most, and I'd probably mak= e it better if I started today, but ... it exists! It might be the first/on= ly (?) vibe-BIP, and, as of last week, due to Cashapp and Square support, i= t's possible that BIP 177 is now in more people's hands than not.= =C2=A0

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. These newer BIPs are increasingly technical, and I ha= ve also started vibe-coding implementations to test them, and I continue gr= owing into an engineer.=C2=A0

Now the BIP repo is = my favorite part of Bitcoin and interacting with Bitcoin Core. I feel since= re gratitude to three BIP reviewers specifically for humoring my sincere, y= et not matured, effort and desire to improve Bitcoin without changing conse= nsus code.

My vision for the BIP repo and reviewer= s, and AI, is much different than yours. It is part of the story that broug= ht me closer to Bitcoin development, and deep respect to my superiors for t= olerating me while I was/am fledgling.=C2=A0

Pleas= e don't add more weird subjective, exclusive barriers just because AI i= s warping reality. Deal with it, and please, please, continue making an eff= ort 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 peo= ple, not only the specs.=C2=A0

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

~John Carvalho


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

With outright AI 'authorship' you i= mmediately 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 bitcoind= ev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.co= m/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAOCjZ9TLtsyjXTdonWK-zUj-V%3DHtFnDeb92D_W%2BVPV6TCg%3D= onw%40mail.gmail.com.
--0000000000004da38706440302bd--