Perfect is the enemy of good. Just because every consumption choice cannot be ethical, doesn’t mean none of them should be.

I am condemning Linus and others like him because the choice to not use LLMs isn’t a difficult one to make. You only lose a little comfort. So when you choose to trade everything shitty that LLM usage necessitates for a little comfort, just as Linus likes to say, you can go fuck yourself.

EDIT: Grammar

Reading these comments I have to contend that the halo effect is indeed powerful.

IMO it’s immoral to use LLM’s for any and every purpose and I think every slopper should be called out; no matter how accomplished they are.

After reading other comments I see now how the author’s stance was ignorant. But what context should I have added? That I am not the author?

Although I’m not really new to Lemmy in general, making posts is a new one for me but I am willing to learn how to make better posts.

Firstly, why the hostility? Neither myself nor the author of the blog are advocating pro-slop positions.

Secondly, it isn’t false as Codeberg doesn’t give it’s users voting powers. It gives voting powers to active members. How would a user supposed to have known to register as an active member to vote on a topic impacting them that wasn’t covered by the TOS beforehand? If you follow the tech news on the fediverse then sure. But that isn’t a necessary requirement to host a Codeberg repo. Can you really confidently claim that everything was communicated perfectly regarding this ban?

Is it? After reading the article and the original post in the kernel mailing list, IMO the article depicts Linus’ opinions accurately.

Was also astonished to find out that Linus considers people who advocate for sustainable tech are doing so solely out of fear and that AI can’t be criticised because humans also make errors.