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

  1. 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
  2. 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.
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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.
  6. 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.

  • auzy1@lemmy.worldOP
    21·
    8 hours ago

    You better let the hackers know you’re being ethical then. Because they’re not going to keep using AI to identify security flaws

    • elixir_fan@lemmy.ml
      1·
      6 hours ago

      I’ve gone through a few automated security reports out of curiosity and they were bizarre rather than useful. I’m sure for stuff like the kernel it’s actually very useful and important, but I’m skeptical that the economics of agents make sense for anyone other than big governments and corpos running them, so rather than random hackers I expect corporate espionage to make use of these tools, considering how expensive it is to get the hardware you need to run open models, then how expensive it is to keep it running and cooling, and then the fact that it will degrade with use.

      I’m sure it will get more efficient eventually, or at the very least it will be much cheaper to acquire the hardware needed for these models in a few years as China keeps developing its silicon industry, then it will be cheaper for random folks to use these tools for detecting vulnerabilities on random systems, but as it stands today these machines burn absurd amounts of money, and for the applications I’ve interacted with, the bugs were very much irrelevant as they required giving the end user access to internal apis and not use any sanity checks, which is absurd with everything that’s user input related.