this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2026
57 points (80.0% liked)

Steam Hardware

21605 readers
103 users here now

A place to discuss and support all Steam Hardware, including Steam Deck, Steam Machine, Steam Frame, and SteamOS in general.

As Lemmy doesn't have flairs yet, you can use these prefixes to indicate what type of post you have made, eg:
[Flair] My post title

The following is a list of suggested flairs:
[Deck] - Steam Deck related.
[Machine] - Steam Machine related.
[Frame] - Steam Frame related.
[Discussion] - General discussion.
[Help] - A request for help or support.
[News] - News about the deck.
[PSA] - Sharing important information.
[Game] - News / info about a game on the deck.
[Update] - An update to a previous post.
[Meta] - Discussion about this community.

If your post is only relevant to one hardware device (Deck/Machine/Frame/etc) please specify which one as part of the title or by using a device flair.

These are not enforced, but they are encouraged.

Rules:

Link to our Matrix Space

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

So when the news circulated recently that the Lutris developer was using Claude to help write the code (and the angry posts/articles appeared) I figured I'd reach out to Mathieu to hear his side of things.

I chatted to him a little, asking for his side of the story. He goes into some depth on how he uses it as part of his work-flow, the transparency in open-source projects in general, licensing and ownership of code that A.I. writes, safety and so on. Plenty of answers from Lutris, if you're curious on the topic. As ever, you can find the link here:

https://gardinerbryant.com/mathieu-comandon-explains-his-use-of-ai-in-lutris-development/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zedstrian@sopuli.xyz 53 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Also, there is enough open source code available that I would hope Anthropic doesn’t feel the need to train their models on potentially litigious code base.

The problem with this statement is twofold. Firstly, it is unrealistic to assume that leading AI companies are staying entirely above board in terms of code licensing. With how widespread AI is, this makes it all the harder for developers to enforce their licenses when many developers inevitably violate their terms without knowing.

Even if that code is open source, licensing terms typically require attribution that an AI is unlikely to provide for every segment of code cobbled together. When the developers that had their code taken and reused are unable to know who reused it, it is disingenuous to work under a 'take first, ask later (if found out)' mentality.