There appears to be a few bad actors in the Lemmy community spreading ragebait for personal gain
In fact, the same mechanisms added at the beginning to catch bad human written code are the exact same that catch bad AI code
- No, the Linux kernel DOES NOT use AI to automatically approve code for inclusion. As far as I can tell, there are no plans to do so
- The Kernel actually has a huge number of maintainers. As part of the process, all patches are reviewed by a human who provide feedback as part of the process, and patches get bounced back and forth multiple time.
- Patches don’t just magically go straight to master. The maintainers generally have their own branches where it goes to, then it goes to staging trees like Linux-Next. It goes through many eyes, and many tests by the end. The idea that AI code is overrunning the kernel is rediculous
- Maintainers also check that the code meets coding guidelines and is written properly, and solves the problem they are trying to solve. Yes, they also ensure the code isn’t slop
- LLM’s though might be used to identify obvious problems with the code (which they are VERY good at), or even identify code that doesn’t follow coding guidelines.
- The only thing that matters is the human who submitted the code, as they should be checking the code submitted anyway (including LLM generated code)
Writing bad code isn’t something new, and isn’t unique to LLM’s. Coders (and it seems some “journalists”) have been writing slop since computers were invented.
The process hasn’t gotten less stringent (probably even MORE stringent as there is an additional set of robotic eyes that can also check), and the same mechanisms that were put in place to catch badly written code 10 years ago, are still there now… With no changes.
I’ve seen some rage bait and people spreading falsehoods about Linus and his outlook on LLMs… but what personal gain is there to be had? I would’ve assumed all the misinformation I’ve seen is just doomerist outrage.
The satisfaction of being “on the good side” and “sticking it to the man” with righteous outrage, as usual with these things. I fucking hate AI, but trying to tear down Linus (and the rest of the Kernel team) over them trying to see if it makes sense to use is silly. They aren’t planning to drop their rigorous QA or to accept code the submitter can’t explain/maintain. Ethics are a concern, but since the end result will be FOSS I personally don’t care as much either (YMMV).
I’m also really interested in hearing how this will go for them and what policies they will ultimately implement. I expect them to do this properly, which then means that everyone can point to their implementation when confronted with vibe coding at work. And then the suits will decide that they’d rather just do it cheap & fast, fucking everything up yet again, but at least they will have been told so.
I appreciate this level headed response. I tend to agree with you all around, and I think that no other humans on earth are more equipped to manage the use of AI than the team of mostly altruistic people who brought us OS choice. I find it hard to believe they will completely botch it or learn no lessons. I too dislike AI but I also recognize it may have some uses. Thinking it’s all bad, imo, is binary thinking. I think AI may end up being a net negative for humanity honestly, but 1) we don’t know that yet 2) the Assholes capable of regulating it dgaf. Regulation is really the only tool we have. Blind rage is not a tool in any scenario, including this one.