There was a significant mixup in communicating the boundaries for OCC 2026. I believed there were no rules, because it is what the event text said. It turns out there was an unwritten norm of no AI or LLM usage.
Bummer!
Moving on, I’ll be doing my own thing and not participating in OCC.
Technology is not a purist activity to me. The lines blur. The way we interact with technology frequently melds into the next thing. I am not going to work in a clean room.
We did discuss why this implicit anti-LLM rule exists. More than one person agreed with me that it’s not so much the technology itself, but the social implications around it, which in turn motivates their anti-LLM sentiment. In particular, a lot of folks are being forced to adopt LLM/AI at work for tasks which are not served well by AI adoption.
I understand the frustration. I have been burnt out from work too. But I do not intend on police others based on my own negative experiences. So from where I sit, it feels like a double standard. I don’t feel welcome and would rather cease participation.
When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
When you have a pet AI, everything looks like an automation problem.
I don’t think like that, but I recognize the possibility for AI overuse.
I remain interested in using tools proportionally and honestly. I’ll be continuing the DOS OBD-II project under my own flag and at my own pace.
(Previous posts in series will be updated from “OCC” to “OCC-Adjacent”.)