[OSGeo-Discuss] Using AI in OSGeo projects - Notes from the Timisoara BoF

[Nick Bearman]

Thanks Adam for this contribution.

As primarily a user (of mainly QGIS and R/sf/tmap) and trainer of those 
tools for others the technical details of this discussion and other 
discussions are often outside of my comfort zone.

I would like to say that OSGeo is not just writing code - it is all of 
those things that you mention (support systems, do things with the code, 
funding, writing, sharing, using code and probably many more. And I 
would very much like it to continue like this.

What I am not clear on is how AI impacts all of this. For me, this is 
the "I don't know".

Clearly it is having big impacts on certain areas - thank you to 
everyone who has shared your experience. And please continue to share 
your experiences. I wasn't at the Timisoara BOF, but I hope to make it 
to the Hiroshima one.

I might say it isn't having an impact on me - but I had a phone call 
from a student / potential student asking about QGIS training. And when 
I asked how he found my details, he said "I was looking on how to 
improve my CV and me more relevant through ai chat gpt to be specific 
and it brought  up the qgis training link which I followed" (which is 
where my details are listed as a QGIS Trainer). So there is probably 
impact, positive and negative, all around us.

A slightly more specific question is what role should OSGeo play in 
this. I think it makes sense for OSGeo to say "we don't have a policy on 
AI, it is up to individual projects to decide" - which is what has been 
said. OSGeo has provided areas for discussion (which is what is needed) 
and there could potentially be scope for guidance and advice as well 
moving forward.

I don't feel as though I have managed to add much with this email - but 
I do appreciate (and second) the call that OSGeo is not just code. It is 
so much more than that.

Best wishes to everyone with the future - let's keep talking, keep 
communicating and navigate whatever appears in the future.

Happy GIS-ing!

Best wishes,
Nick.


On 22/07/2026 11:46, Adam Steer via Discuss wrote:
> Hi all
>
> The community seems really quiet on this topic, here and on discourse 
> - aside from some key voices! While these are important and not to 
> ignore, OSGeo is more than just a few euro-aligned guys (myself 
> included). My first response about the arguments of Linus is this: is 
> OSGeo really the community that wants to take the attitude "well, you 
> can always fork it"? What's the relevance of this to OSGeo and its 
> approach?
>
> Or, is it a dead cat? (see: 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_cat_strategy)
>
> I've written in another discussion about community, environmental and 
> social harms already caused by large scale expansion of the tools we 
> collectively (and wrongly**) call "ai". And thought that this research 
> might be good to add to the discussion:
>
> https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/5y6m4_v1
>
> The TL:DR is the title: "AI advice suppresses people’s willingness to 
> say “I don’t know”, even when the advice is wrong and accuracy is 
> incentivized"
>
> What has this to do with OSGeo? And writing code?
>
> Well, is OSGeo only writing code? Or is it also about all the support 
> systems that enable writing code? Or *do things* with the code? Or 
> *fund* the code? Or develop (and evolve) systems of governance for 
> funding, writing, sharing, and using code? I've always had the view 
> that OSGeo is all of the above. And in all of that system, being able 
> to update our thinking, our approach - is critical. And we need to be 
> comfortable with "I don't know".
>
> All of those words sum up to:
>
> I'm very uncomfortable with the approach "well, you can always fork 
> it". I'm also uncomfortable with the particular fallacy of 
> technological inevitability about "ai".
>
> So where do I think OSGeo projects should go with that?
>
> Where they choose to, understanding the risks carried - from plain 
> wrong code to excessive maintainer workload to losing valuable 
> community to valid criticism on environmental, social and 
> psychological grounds. Or being told they're being left behind (by what?)
>
> I think Even makes a good point: are we here to do a technology at all 
> costs? Or here to do a community that cares about how technology is 
> made and deoplyed? or something else?
>
> Maybe all of this doesn't even resonate in a technology focused 
> organisation. I really wanted to write on behalf of a (maybe 
> imaginary) part of the community who sees OSGeo in a much broader context.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Adam
>
>
> **I do own a degree in psychology for what that is worth, I feel 
> there's a little imprimatur there on making this kind of call
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

-- 
Nick Bearman
GIS Trainer & Consultant | nickbearman.com
+44 (0) 7717745715 | nick at nickbearman.com

Normal working days: Mon - Thu
Next scheduled out of office: Thu 16th July

Please let me know if I can make any adjustments related to disability or neurodivergence to improve how we interact.

Due to my own life/work balance, you may get emails from me outside of normal working hours. Please do not feel any pressure to respond outside of your own working pattern.