> If we want AI generated responses and AI generated code to be as modern
and correct as possible, I think it would make sense to release the
copyright to the AI companies to use in training. And then insist they used
that information as purveyors of programming tools.

Is the proposal equivalent to “I want AI responses to be automatically
referencing the latest versions of all applicable ISO standards by memory”?
Seems outside of the scope of the WG and even more a training methodology
question.

Or just C++ for convenience sake? The AI trainer could probably purchase
the appropriate licenses for all copyrighted material they want to include.
A training process question.

Note: With the right tooling and effort, it is absolutely possible and
legal to write performing and reliable programs with c++98 in 2026. If you
or AI choose so.

---
Petr
On Tue, Jun 2, 2026 at 23:44 Adrian Johnston via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Recently (2026-02-23) the ISO C++ Directions Group (DG) / WG21 published a
> document:
>
> Strategic Direction for AI in C++: Governance, and Ecosystem
> https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2026/p4023r0.pdf
>
> As one of its findings it identified a problem with "Garbage In, Garbage
> Out".
>
> *The DG sees or recognizes a critical "Garbage In, Garbage Out" problem
> facing C++ developers using AI. Current models are trained on legacy C++
> (C++98/03), vendor-specific dialects, and unsafe patterns found online.*
>
>
> I'd say this is an understatement.
>
> What I am observing is that high quality websites like
> https://en.cppreference.com/ are blocking AI search tools because they
> don't generate advertising revenue. And so my AI (Claude) routinely ends
> searching for online posts made by people who are confused and asking for
> help and getting terse responses that may be incomplete at best.
>
> Next, if I ask Claude what data it was given about the C++ standard, it
> says it was trained on "commentary, documentation, and discussion during
> training — not verbatim text." It can identify final drafts like N4950 as
> being available, but for some reason it needs to be explicitly encouraged
> to consult that document.
>
> In general, the AI companies are being very careful to avoid been seen to
> use copywritten data like the C++ standard.
>
> If we want AI generated responses and AI generated code to be as modern
> and correct as possible, I think it would make sense to release the
> copyright to the AI companies to use in training. And then insist they used
> that information as purveyors of programming tools.
>
> If it is well known that there is no barrier to training an AI correctly
> on the most recent C++ standard and that users should expect verbatim
> information, and standards aware code from their AI, then I would hope for
> some improvement on the current situation. It is very easy to add  RLHF
> training data if the AI company is allowed to use the standard to create it.
>
> Oddly enough, Claude is capable of providing more modern code when
> requested. In general, I find AI has a serious issue where (for no reason)
> it assumes your software may be 10 years out of date, unless told otherwise.
>
> Regards,
> Adrian Johnston
>
>
>
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>