What AI haters don’t get is that the people fanning the flames of AI(LLM’s) hate are the same people who want you to buy their subscriptions, because they know the only place where the real damage will occur is in OpenSource communities.
AI use for Open Source projects is arguably the one use case that benefits everyone, plus it’s a sweet irony against corps and their locked-down proprietary software. Denouncer will loudly hawk that LLMs will make it trivial to circumvent the GPL, but they fail to mention that the pendulum swings both ways; with LLMs, it’s now easier than ever to reverse engineer proprietary systems and programs, recently there was a similar discourse on lemmy due to the mario kart wii decompilation.
They want loud people to sow division into OpenSource communities so that true opensource LLMs solutions are shunned and never reach maturity, corporate meanwhile is unaffected.
Daddy or chips.
They should ask for a refund
I’ve decided to start moving to NetBSD. The copyright status of genAI code is {very questionable](https://hachyderm.io/@BoydStephenSmithJr/116964500365807149), and it’s likely any project that integrates it, with be “extinguished” via legal action in the future.
unpopular opinion, especially on the fediverse, but: AI is not inherently bad.
it is a tool, that can do everything to a pretty low standard but rather fast. so it is up to the learnt human to use the thing at the right time. i use the company ai at regularly at work, but treat it as an apprentice: every line of code has to be checked, because it will fail hilariously. but it does type faster than me, so simple and boring jobs can be done by it.
i don’t see the appeal of avoiding generated code at all cost. it is not different from human code in that it can fail horribly. the important thing is oversight. is there someone with the knowledge and keen eye to ensure no BS is merged. Linus, in my opinion, spent a lifetime building that reputation.
I think there’s a big difference between
A. Expecting people to pay you and give you credit for something AI made for you
vs
B. Playing with AI and if it spits out something you like a lot you keep it to yourself unless someone else specifically asks you to show it to them.It’s basically masturbation.
People are gonna do it to themselves and enjoy it but if you try to show me that shit without my consent we are not going to be friends.
Finally got where I stand: why uncomfortable? It’s just being hard to impose a sensible approach to it:
- yes, llms can be used as a tool efficiently
- no, killing the planet along the way is not an option, this has to
stopbe stopped
It’s a tool like any other. If used correctly it can provide a great value to the world. If used incorrectly then in this case it can also do the opposite. AI isn’t good or bad intrinsically. It boils down to our relationship to it. The same can be said for all the other tools, radio, television, internet and so on.
I would trust Linus Torvalds to use AI to do this because the AI is literally trying to copy him when it writes that code. In that context, he is the training data.
I especially like his most recent use of LLMs.
Specifically as a threat to induce someone else to step up as a maintainer of the debug tool sparse.
The problem with majority of “LLM critics” is that they are brain dead luddites that argue with ragebait emotion rather than rationality.
Unsurprisingly LLMs are just computers that can be useful, can be wasteful, can be life saving and can be society destroyed - it’s a tool.
AI is like a power tool. If you give a contractor a nail gun instead of a hammer he can build a house faster. If you give someone who has no idea how to build a house a nail gun they’ll just fail at building a house faster than if you only gave them a hammer and they’ll probably hurt themselves.
I can build my bosses app faster with ai, but I would never build any app I want to maintain with it. It’s too low quality code for my standards.
LAInus.
Fuck off with these fake AI bubble pumping stories. fake ass grifters reading the same script wherever you go (“Im a mathamatician and IM SCARED” lol)
It’s all horse shit.
Sorry guys but your AI powered sex doll is going in the chipper along with her unpublished Unified Field theory.
I know you said all, but I’m curious which part do you think is horse shit? Do you think Torvalds is lying about using AI all together? or just how useful AI actually was? The commit with the alleged AI use is in the an RC for the next release, and it is authored by Torvalds.
Some of a bitch!
Just a few days ago, I argued with a douche nozzle who told me, with the confidence of a master debater, that AI has no useful purpose.
But apparently, not all of you feel that way. Linus uses AI and suddenly y’all change your tune! What a load of crap!
I’ve been sitting here saying for years that AI is a tool and should be used as such, while getting called a tech-bro simp for saying it.
Man, this has once again revealed the massive, two-faced, bandwagon nature of Lemmy.
Y’all should have stayed on Reddit!
It’s interesting to see AI being used for something as practical as debugging a Linux issue. I think the bigger question is how much developers can rely on AI without losing their understanding of the underlying code. AI can clearly speed things up, but human review still seems essential.
It’s especially essential to mark the code as AI generated. AI makes mistakes just as humans do. Problem is AI makes different kinds of mistakes than humans.
A human will tend to forget to do something they were supposed to do. An AI will do a bunch of unnecessary shit.
Also you can tell that a human didn’t put a lot of thought into some code (no comments, sloppy variable names) so you’re more likely to say “yeah ok, I used to make that kind of mistake when I was younger” and just fix it. AI generated code will have all kinds of comments which normally makes you more hesitant before making a change. It looks like someone really thought through what they were doing, but in reality it’s something generated by an LLM and no real thought was given to the code.
Also you can tell that a human didn’t put a lot of thought into some code (no comments, sloppy variable names)
Why is your code so messy that it needs comments everywhere? Comments should pretty much be reserved for special cases anyway
Using AI is not the same as vibe coding.
Asking AI to write a piece of code and then read it, understand and use, is a very reasonable use case.
Using AI is not the same as vibe coding.
i’ve been in dozens of lemmy threads that disagree…
There’s a huge portion of lemmy who think even one token of AI is unacceptable for any reason
I’m in a thread where the entire idea of AI/LLMs has been declared facist, with ZERO legitimate use cases other than facism
that’s like declaring electric light racism and keep using light bulbs…
Like all people that see racism everywhere, they will fail…
It’s a tool, use it where it works well.
I agree with you…
But be prepared to be labelled a facist on lemmy
apparently there’s no such thing as a neutral technology or tool
So um, as a sociology student, there [i]is indeed no such thing as neutral technology or tool[/i]. Everything is created within systems of power, and its production will always require externalisation of some costs. Artefacts do have politics, because we live in a social world, use social language, etc.
[b]However[/b], this does not mean that it is a moral failing, cuz otherwise everybody existing in society would be evil. We live in an imperfect world, and our own position in it, legible through the symbolic order, is continually accepted, rejected, naturalised, de-naturalised, interpreted, re-interpreted, and negotiated.
Call out harm where you can, accept some difficulties to avoid stuff you find especially egregious if you can, but ultimately, don’t moralise it against yourself if you can’t.
TL;DR There is no neutral tool or technology, but that doesn’t mean you’re morally complicit by not resisting everything. Try to minimise harm where you can, but don’t beat yourself up if you can’t either.
I wonder how long before he gets comfy relying on it and something really shitty slips in.
Dude merges in code into the kernel originating from how many thousands of developers from around the world?
Read the LKML if you think he’s a guy that’s prone to getting comfy with merging in sub-par code.
oh he’s quick to put the brakes on other PR’s including slop code.
which makes me wonder how long until he’s comfy and forgets sometimes the slop comes from inside the building lol.
You assume humans don’t ever write sloppy code and Linux Torvalds has never before encountered someone wanting to merge in sloppy code before. If in decades he hasn’t gotten comfy with sloppy code written by humans, why would he suddenly be merging in sloppy code written by an AI? He’s never been worried about hurting the feelings of a human that’s writing sloppy, do you suppose he’s going to develop empathy for an LLM that’s writing sloppy code?
The people that go all in on vibe coding are people that aren’t very good programmers to begin with. They don’t really understand how to write code and then suddenly they can make things work quickly. Well sort of work. At least work about as well as they could with their limited skills.
People that are actually good at programming know what good code is. After decades of working with code and knowing what it’s supposed to be, you don’t suddenly become a vibe coder saying eh, it kind of works, good enough, ship it. Its the people that were never able to write high quality code to begin with that do that. It can do the job of a lazy programmer that has a low standard of quality. For a skilled developer, it can sometimes save on typing on some simple tasks, and a good developer knows when it did something wrong and be all Thanos and say “fine, I’ll do it myself”.
Is Linus error-free pre-AI?
If AI makes Linus more (quantity) or more severely (quality) error-prone than without the AI, that, and only that is an argument against AI being a tech asset for Linus.
Just one bad Linux kernel commit slip up related to AI is not an argument.
That said, the macro impact of the AI data centers and AI on: electric power generation and grids, pollution (smelly exhaust, noise, CO2), fresh water demands, socioeconomic power imbalance exacerbation, surveillance capitalism, questionable military usages, rogue agentic AI doing hacks and crimes to fulfill oterwise legal/ethical objectives, AI chatbot relationship addiction, these are some of what I consider real and urgent problems with AI.
As an individual, his LLM carbon footprint and money used to purchase AI services aren’t going to matter at all. But him being one of the world’s highest profiled software engineers who’s openly using these tools is very good publicity for them.
I think the anti ai crowd has been focusing on the slop angle too much, the horrible malpractice of these companies is the real problem imo. If it really is only slop it will die out by itself.
Yeah, and Torvalds using generative AI to write code is not the same as Bobby LinkedIn telling us he’s coding his third app this week.
