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
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 😛
