I don’t disagree that LLMs are very useful when debugging and such, but it’s disappointing that he talks down to people trying to do the right thing and fighting so we have jobs and we don’t end the world. I’m not out there doing any of that but I appreciate folks that do.
Thanks fir directly linking the mailinglist response from Torvalds instead of linking to an article referencing it! Always better to point to the source of truth.
Overall I agree with Torvalds standpoint: If you do Not want to use AI -> that’s fine. If you want to use it and you are producing good results -> also fine If you want to use it and produce Bad results (e.g. do not review/Check theory output) -> Not good and your contribution will be rejected
It is a tool. Use it as such.
Of course this does not cover the economics of AI and If these huge Investments will pay for themself in the Future .
he says it’s all about open source
how does he verify the spat out code is not a proprietary snippet
How do you verify that no human has given a proprietary snippet? 🤔
that’s fair, my bad
the problem could arise when it comes to figuring out whose responsibility it is when the snippet makes it’s way into the code though
also llm arguably has access to a lot more proprietary source codes than a few humans normally could
the way people willingly give access to a lot of IP, that normally would be somehow guarded, to llm companies is puzzling
the fact that they do it because the management basically asked them to is even more puzzling
It’s the same as when you use a generative tool: if your name is on it, it’s your problem.
Oh I’m pretty certain none of their code is written by AI. If you read what he says carefully, he’s most impressed with how it can identify issues and guide the project to what needs attention. They’ve loudly complained about low-effort AI submissions previously, so AI code is not what he’s really talking about here.
AI is absolutely killer at issue identification and is getting better. He knows, as they all know, they won’t be able to survive without it going forward because if it can identify vulnerabilities for them it can identify vulnerabilities to anyone.
that’s probably what he meant given the history of his statements, thanks
Well fucking said, Linus.
his words are what i experience in “real life”. only online do people get religous and emotional to the point of throwing out any critical thinking.
Mhm yes, just let us brush of the valid concerns, job loss and health risks and brain anthropy associated by LLMs and data centre. Its just the terminal online luddities talk about.
Yep, I’ve never experienced that kind of anti AI zealotry IRL. (Because if you interpret someone saying “only online are people extreme” as “let’s brush off the concerns” that is zealotry)
brain anthropy
case in point ;)
case in point
Example B
Its a hard word okay? :)
as long as they don’t vibe code the kernel 😛
