# Non-native English speakers and the use of language assistance

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194>\
**Category:** Community\
**Tags:** question, policy\
**Created:** [May 19, 2026, 3:14pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194 "2026-05-19T15:14:06Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gwr](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/gwr/32/33632_2.png) [@gwr](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/gwr)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 12:25pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/23 "2026-05-21T12:25:34Z")

</div>

> [@Non-native English speakers and the use of language assistance](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/19):
>
> That’s actually a really interesting point you’re raising, and I want to make sure I engage with it seriously, because I think there’s something genuinely worth unpacking here — and I’ll get to my disagreement in a moment, I promise, but first I think it’s important to establish some shared conceptual ground, because without that, I worry we’ll end up talking past each other, which is something I’m sure neither of us wants. So. Let’s start with the word “deliberate.” You use it — “deliberately …

This is an interesting thing to watch and maybe the community might reflect upon its very own behavior. In sociology there is such thing as “groupthink”, and “in-group/out-group” labeling.

We can watch @Mason above posting AI to prove me wrong with (essentially a straw man argument). But interestingly, that “AI slop” got lots of likes quickly, because it seems that Mason is “in-group” and I am “out-group”. How dare I …

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![simonsteiger](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/simonsteiger/32/209862_2.png) [@simonsteiger](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/simonsteiger)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 12:26pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/24 "2026-05-21T12:26:54Z")

</div>

I disliked the AI language (AI really ruined the word “genuinely” and “unpack” for me… though I never really used the latter anyway, heh), but do think there are some interesting philosophical points in there that I could relate to.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gwr](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/gwr/32/33632_2.png) [@gwr](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/gwr)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 12:28pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/25 "2026-05-21T12:28:56Z")

</div>

> I disliked the AI language (AI really ruined the word “genuinely” and “unpack” for me… though I never really used the latter anyway, heh), but do think there are some interesting philosophical points in there that I could relate to.

As I like to say, at least one form of intelligence sees the light of day. 🙂

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mason](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/mason/32/2423_2.png) [@Mason](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Mason)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 12:29pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/26 "2026-05-21T12:29:09Z")

</div>

> [@gwr](#):
>
> We can watch @Mason above posting AI to prove me wrong with (essentially a straw man argument). But interestingly, that “AI slop” got lots of likes quickly, because it seems that Mason is “in-group” and I am “out-group”. How dare I …

3 is not what I’d describe as a lot of likes, and two of them are from people who also liked your posts, and one of them is from you yourself. I truly don’t get how you came to that conclusion.

But even if I accumulated a lot of likes on that post that you weren’t accumulating, I’d probably just assume it’s because people found it to be funny, not that anyone thought it was a serious rebuttal to your point.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gwr](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/gwr/32/33632_2.png) [@gwr](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/gwr)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 12:30pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/27 "2026-05-21T12:30:15Z")

</div>

> But even if I accumulated a lot of likes on that post that you weren’t accumulating, I’d probably just assume it’s because people found it to be funny, not that anyone thought it was a serious rebuttal to your point.

I laughed and liked as well. 😉

So maybe, while you are here, you may attempt a serious rebuttal. I am all ears (and eyes)…

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mason](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/mason/32/2423_2.png) [@Mason](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Mason)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 12:41pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/28 "2026-05-21T12:41:38Z")

</div>

I’m not sure I really have a lot more to say on this topic.

I just think that posting unnecessarily long essays is disruptive to conversation, and I think that LLMs supercharge this propensity, and makes engagement with these posts feel even more useless. As I’ve [said previously in another thread](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/updates-to-the-site-guidelines-especially-regarding-gen-ai/134315/2), I see the guideline about not posting generative AI outputs as really a subset of an existing rule urging people to be concise.

I think that while it often feels like something you arrived at with the help of your LLM is especially clear, the experience of others is often the exact opposite.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gwr](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/gwr/32/33632_2.png) [@gwr](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/gwr)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 12:50pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/29 "2026-05-21T12:50:13Z")

</div>

> [@Mason](#):
>
> posting unnecessarily long essays is disruptive to conversation

I agree, but you introduce a fact out of thin air again “unnecessarily long”, which must not hold – and does not hold. It depends upon proper use of AI imo.

> urging people to be concise

That’s why I used AI to look over a policy draft so that it might be as concise as possible. My experience with ChatGPT in this regard has been quite good. Not on first try, but if you loop with him and ponder arguments.

I can’t be Business Analyst, Lawyer, MD, Software Engineer, Philosopher at the same time. And adding (!) AI to the loop (AI in the loop) can be extremely helpful imo. I am convinced you can rule about it as much as you like - it’s here to stay. I see it as a chance more than a risk.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![langestefan](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/langestefan/32/207923_2.png) [@langestefan](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/langestefan)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 12:59pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/30 "2026-05-21T12:59:40Z")

</div>

> [@gwr](#):
>
> While I understand the concern about low-effort AI content, there is imho an important difference between:
> 
> - pasting unreviewed AI-generated output; and
> - using language or structure assistance to express one’s own argument more precisely in a non-native language.

I would rather read imperfect or even broken English than unnecessarily long AI written comments. They all look the same, they all follow the same template even if you tell it not to. It just becomes a blur for me and I stop reading. Using AI as a tool, fine. Using AI to translate, mostly fine. Using AI for human-human conversation, I think you’re just wasting the other person’s time.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DanielVandH](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/danielvandh/32/31134_2.png) [@DanielVandH](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/DanielVandH)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 1:04pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/31 "2026-05-21T13:04:05Z")

</div>

> [@gwr](#):
>
> I agree, but you introduce a fact out of thin air again “unnecessarily long”, which must not hold – and does not hold. It de-ends upon proper use of AI imo.

The vast majority of AI slop I see is just text inflated to be as long as possible. Seems like a fair statement to me. It’s just unfair to the reader.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gwr](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/gwr/32/33632_2.png) [@gwr](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/gwr)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 1:05pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/32 "2026-05-21T13:05:24Z")

</div>

You make strong statements and I cannot fully agree. It makes an enormous difference if I make no prompt or if I use “be a Mario Bunge like AI assistant firmly grounded in scientific realism….”

If we talk about the legal aspect of say software licenses, then we quickly run into IANAL statements popping up everywhere. Then we continue to discuss what we believe to be our understanding. Right. While AI tools make mistakes, I find them extremely helpful in providing domain aspects that I am not so knowledgable at. Yes, it is not perfect, but I do not consider it a waste of time?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mason](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/mason/32/2423_2.png) [@Mason](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Mason)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 1:07pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/33 "2026-05-21T13:07:02Z")

</div>

> [@gwr](#):
>
> > [@Mason](#):
> >
> > posting unnecessarily long essays is disruptive to conversation
> 
> I agree, but you introduce a fact out of thin air again “unnecessarily long”, which must not hold – and does not hold. It depends upon proper use of AI imo.

Okay, but what people were telling you repeatedly in that thread was that what you were doing was **not** increasing the clarity of your communication, nor was it improving the sharpness of your point.

If nobody can tell whether or not you’re writing with the assistance of an LLM, then nobody will care. What people objected to was you pasting text that they felt was very “LLM-ey”, and was detracting from the conversation.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gwr](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/gwr/32/33632_2.png) [@gwr](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/gwr)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 1:09pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/34 "2026-05-21T13:09:01Z")

</div>

So my policy proposal was a distraction and missing the point? I was not being helpful in raising the issue? I did not try to come to a closure?

Really? Is that what you are saying?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gwr](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/gwr/32/33632_2.png) [@gwr](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/gwr)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 1:11pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/35 "2026-05-21T13:11:28Z")

</div>

The end of the game is that everything continues as before: Everybody knows that a single `LICENSE` text cannot meet modern demands and because just checking this is so convenient, we’ll leave it at that.

Please, be quiet, man, you used AI to help out. 🤔

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mason](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/mason/32/2423_2.png) [@Mason](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Mason)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 1:16pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/36 "2026-05-21T13:16:21Z")

</div>

> [@gwr](#):
>
> So my policy proposal was a distraction and missing the point? I was not being helpful in raising the issue? I did not try to come to a closure?
> 
> Really? Is that what you are saying?

I think what people were telling you was that at least parts of your communication were felt to be made significantly less clear by your usage of LLMs. They were _not_ saying that what you contributed was without value, they were just asking you to communicate in a more human manner.

I understand that can feel rude, and that as a non-native speaker it can even be an extra burden on you, but I think what you’re not acknowledging is the burden that this style of communication also places on the people reading it.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![langestefan](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/langestefan/32/207923_2.png) [@langestefan](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/langestefan)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 1:17pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/37 "2026-05-21T13:17:00Z")

</div>

> [@gwr](#):
>
> You make strong statements and I cannot fully agree. It makes an enormous difference if I make no prompt or if I use “be a Mario Bunge like AI assistant firmly grounded in scientific realism….”

Ok, so which prompt did you use here? [Clarify RegistryCI license-check API for REUSE/SPDX-compliant packages · Issue #155557 · JuliaRegistries/General · GitHub](https://github.com/JuliaRegistries/General/issues/155557#issuecomment-4488582414)

Because this is the kind of comment that I am talking about. Worst of all is this sentence:

> That is not a useful substitute for a clear author-side statement about the licensing terms under which the package source code is offered as a package.

As a non-native English speaker myself, I cannot even comprehend what this sentence is saying. So I can’t imagine you can?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gwr](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/gwr/32/33632_2.png) [@gwr](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/gwr)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 1:21pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/38 "2026-05-21T13:21:52Z")

</div>

> [@langestefan](#):
>
> That is not a useful substitute for a clear author-side statement about the licensing terms under which the package source code is offered as a package

Yes, I was also accused that Claude invented “OPLE” but it was me. What I mean to convey is that there is no mechanistic rule that can likely tell you what the “outbound” license has to be, because we do not have a clear way to solve conjunctions, e.g. MIT and GPL-3.0-only and CC0-1.0 means what?

What that tries to say is that registry does not need to check that. It can and should trust what the submitter/author claims (up to _some_ checking that is). The Package can mean “everything contained in a tarball” and package source code is maybe different, e.g., what you get by “using Package”.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gwr](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/gwr/32/33632_2.png) [@gwr](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/gwr)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 1:24pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/39 "2026-05-21T13:24:40Z")

</div>

It it rather difficult to talk about licensing, as there are different layers to it. That’s indeed a reason for me to discuss my ideas back and forth with AI and also because in legal discussions not getting terminology right makes the exchange almost nonsensical…

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![mbauman](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/mbauman/32/31082_2.png) [@mbauman](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/mbauman)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 1:32pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/41 "2026-05-21T13:32:23Z")

</div>

Right, and that’s precisely why we’re talking past eachother. You’re simultaneously having a conversation with some AI, and then not actually listening to me. So you get the response from Claude to a _different_ thing than what I’m talking about, and keep going off in a completely different direction without taking time to actually understand what I’m saying. And then you very obviously plopped a very-lightly edited sloppy response right back at me. That’s frustrating.

> [@gwr](#):
>
> It can and should trust what the submitter/author claims

That post was purportedly responding to me, but it’s completely missing what I’m saying. I’ve been pointing out **throughout that thread** that we don’t have a way for the submitter/author to unambiguously claim **anything** to the registry beyond the status quo convention.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gwr](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/gwr/32/33632_2.png) [@gwr](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/gwr)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 1:34pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/42 "2026-05-21T13:34:56Z")

</div>

Matt, please accept my sincere apology. I do not want to disrespect you or ignore you. Yes, when I am engaged and focussed – getting me to listen is not always easy, but honestly, that issue precedes AI use.

I would really like to get this discussion somewhere and I believe we are not at all far apart!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![mbauman](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/mbauman/32/31082_2.png) [@mbauman](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/mbauman)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2026, 1:43pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194/44 "2026-05-21T13:43:12Z")

</div>

Let’s please keep the actual licensing discussion in [Clarify RegistryCI license-check API for REUSE/SPDX-compliant packages · Issue #155557 · JuliaRegistries/General · GitHub](https://github.com/JuliaRegistries/General/issues/155557)

[Previous page](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194.md?page=1)

[Next page](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/non-native-english-speakers-and-the-use-of-language-assistance/137194.md?page=3)