GrapheneOS is currently defending its use of AI coding tools on Mastodon against complaints by various accounts claiming to be users.

We do not understand where you're coming from or why you're so incredibly angry with us. It's not justified and does not make sense.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 163 points 1 month ago (55 children)

I'm with Linus Torvalds and GrapheneOS on this. AI is a useful tool, for all its flaws and negative externalities.

  • source
  • hideshow 55 child comments
  • [–] 79 points 1 month ago (14 children)

    I am sure I will be down voted on Lemmy for this but using AI for development by a team who is already experienced in development of the product they are working on is not a moral failing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago (13 children)

    My personal experience but the people who blindly bitch about AI are, quite frankly, idiots.

    I use AI daily for work it's an extremely helpful tool as you stated. I still have concerns with it.

    The difference is I understand human nature and the genie cannot be put back in the bottle. We need governance and standards and it needs to be a utility just like hydro, water and The Internet. There also needs to be a global UBI yesterday.

    What people are bitching about with AI amount to the lack of control we the people have over it.

    I'm surprised you haven't been downvoted but I bet I will for calling a spade a spade in these people so rigidly opposed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (7 children)

    I don't think anyone is "blindly bitching". I think people have understandable concerns regarding its development, use, and proliferation.

    The other idea that it needs to be a utility is straight from the wet dreams of every AI company. Realistically, the average person has little use for AI and it's much more likely to be a detriment to them than otherwise. I know someone who is an exec in a big company and they get AI through their work. They use it for inane things mostly, but recently they used it to generate a list of reasons that their kids *dont need to go to school. This is an educated person with a good job who can't figure out that AI has no idea what their kids need.

    I don't think AI needs to be used by nearly the number of people currently using it, but my bigger concern is letting anyone, be it a private company or a government, have access to something people treat like a magic answer anything machine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    I disagree in part. Many people have replaced searching with AI.

    Take a pic of something in chatGPT. "What is this?"

    It's highly useful in everyday life.

    The problem is that people my age were skilled before AI so it is literally just making things easier for us which is the point.

    Kids on the other hand, it is taking away their opportunity to learn as my generation did and that's a huge problem.

    Then we get back to the underlying problem. Governance and standards.

    Should AI be allowed in school? Should companies be forced to continue entry level jobs that could be phased out by AI?

    You could ask a million questions.

    The problem with human nature is we are great at figuring out if we can do things we don't stop to think of we should do things.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    If you think taking a picture of something and having AI identify it for you is something that 1) people should do on a daily basis and 2) the government should support AI as a utility for, then we have such different concepts of the world we want to live in that I don't think we'll come to an agreement here. I cannot imagine how that would be "highly useful in everyday life" for the average person.

    The whole "You could ask a million questions" while supporting the idea it should be a utility is so weird to me. Like, yes, we could ask a million questions, and I think we should before suggesting it is a service that every citizen should be somewhat entitled to access from the government in some way (with all the caveats that come with a utility etc etc). It seems like you have fallen into the trap you suggest is inherent to human nature and you haven't bothered to ask if we should do that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    The problem with your argument is it runs counter to the facts.

    AI adoption is here. You can bury your head in the sand and pretend that's not so, or you can acknowledge it and know there is work still to do.

    https://www.theglobalstatistics.com/artificial-intelligence-ai-usage-statistics/

    https://hbr.org/2026/06/how-people-are-really-using-ai-in-2026

    https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2025/04/03/artificial-intelligence-in-daily-life-views-and-experiences/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    What argument do you think I'm making and what facts does it run counter to? So a lot of people use AI. That has no relevance to my point at all. Unless you're using popularity of a tool as a proxy for if it's good or not, it's irrelevant to my position. Nuclear proliferation was here at one point, CFCs in everyday consumer products, smoking. There are plenty of things that were popular that we decided were not good for us as a society and we worked to make things different.

    I never said it was unpopular, I said that many people using it have no real need of it and it may be doing more harm than good in many cases. I can say for a fact I know several people who use AI and are worse for doing so. Your own links suggest a majority of the people using it don't find it actually helpful and that they want more control over their interactions with it. That doesn't strike me as a population of people who can't wait to embrace AI or embrace having their governments responsible for ensuring access to it. To be clear, even if they did mostly find it actually helpful, I don't think it means that we need to be providing it.

    Full disclosure, your second link was inaccessible to me so I am going off the data in the other links.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago*

    If people have no need for it then they wouldn't be using it. Full stop. I don't get your argument.

    Clearly the statistics are showing people need it. It is making tasks quicker and/or easier. That's the point.

    You thinking otherwise doesn't change statistics.

    Yes I can do the same shit without it but that means more work and more time. Why would I do that? (I'm saying this as a proxy for the average person)

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

    i trust no business to use ai coding properly, they cut so many corners in crunch already that pure unfiltered slop will for sure end up committed

    we already see this with microslop windows 11 updates

    it is even worse that many coders think it makes them better at their jobs because given how many issues pop up with factual ai use elsewhere i am sure no one rational expects coding to be exempt from this problem, so the least knowledgeable will be the most impacted with false assurance or worse we have other agents validating agent generated code that never has human eyeballs on it

    slop-centipede of shit code

    the biggest coding bugs either fail silently or succeed incorrectly and ai usage makes both of these worse

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Again based on real world experience I disagree. The problem is the people doing the AI coding and how they were before?

    I have a strong coding background. I know what AI is coding for me. I give it strong guardrails. It does for me in minutes something that would take me hours. I will still review and QA what it does.

    The problem is people who use it to built a monolith of code and I've seen my fair share of that AND documentation driven by AI. It's unneedingly obtuse and verbose and reeks of people who do not know what they're doing.

    There is a huge difference in telling AI to "build me a website in Django" vs. "build me a function to do xyz when the parameters are abc and the return value needs to be lmn"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)

    my real world experience is both Microsoft win 10 and win 11 having massive impacting bugs since January

    https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/1qn0h8l/reports_of_boot_failures_with_the_january_2026/#bottom-comments

    in the case of win 11, multiple times

    even if you personally use it right that says nothing about these massive corporations

    also im not anti ai as a concept but anti ai because tech bros are the fucking anti christ

    i know for a fact in the coding sphere i operate in there are people coding via agent -> agent in multi chains

    that shit is terrifying given the field i work in

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago

    Ok? But that's you. I don't work for Microsoft I work for a major financial company and I have not seen the disastrous impacts you are seeing nor are we rolling out end user software.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago

    Nuances?! on MY Fediverse?! tbh im also mostly with Linus and also do not expect his PRs to drop in quality, because of it. He does sometimes say weird things regarding AI though, like that its a great way for upcoming developers to learn and I do not think that is really true, but again: Nuances. I myself keep AI usage minimum and in the constraints of a chat bot, not because its not useful but because I dont wanna get stupid :(

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    Don't forget the negative internalities (it makes it's users dumber and the codebase less maintainable).

    But yes it is useful, and the knee jerk hate comes mostly as a reaction to the marketing lies told by the companies selling it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Experienced developers benefit from it, my guess is because they've already formed their knowledge, habits, opinions, etc.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    I don't think any company has shown productivity gains amongst experienced developers due to AI

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    Devs are lazy. Any productivity gains are negated by them simply choosing to work less and have more free time. Which is not a bad thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    That hasn't been my experience, my experience is that you end up babysitting the LLM so much that you aren't able to get more done.

    I'm not able to spend less time working either as the LLM requires constant supervision.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] [S] -101 points 1 month ago (30 children)

    Luckily, the "negative externalities" are mostly made-up bullshit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] 66 points 1 month ago (17 children)

    The ecological damage is not made up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [+] [S] -35 points 1 month ago (16 children)

    It's pretty insignificant compared to the rest of the economy. Focusing on AI to the exclusion of bigger issues is actively harmful.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [+] 38 points 1 month ago (6 children)
  • [+] [S] -23 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    Renewable energy makes good progress, but as you can see here, many people have other priorities.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 21 points 1 month ago* (4 children)
  • [–] 22 points 1 month ago (8 children)

    It's pretty insignificant

    Citation needed. You're just straight-up lying or clueless as to what's actually going on.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] [S] -18 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    It's not hard to look up. If you need help, ask for help politely.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    That's an "I have no idea what I'm talking about" if I ever heard one.

    "Citation needed" IS polite. You claim it's not polluting, so clearly you know the CO2 emissions numbers from SpaceX's datacenters that are being run off direct-connect to natural gas generators. So, how about it? How "not polluting" are they?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    It’s a matter of framing. If you compare them to older datacenters they are atrocious because they’re bigger and consume more energy. But in the grand scheme of things all things IT pale in comparison to e.g. producing beef. Now with that framing you can’t sell AI hate though because people like beef, so it’s always just comparing large datacenters to smaller datacenters with the obvious results.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago*

    That's an awful lot of typing instead of just saying "I'm a lying liar who doesn't know what he's talking about. That's why I offer no actual data - because the actual numbers destroy my entire argument."

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] [S] -13 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Unfortunately, as you can see, you are in a crowd of liars. Now, I am certainly not accusing you personally of being dishonest, but it does tend to bias your audience against you. Sorry.

    The numbers aren't particularly bad. It's not for nothing that the EU has classified natural gas as green energy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago

    Hey, I think ai can be a useful tool and I use both cloud hosted and local models.

    The ecological impact is god awful.

    Datacenters run on fossil fuel turbines to meet demand when there isn’t enough capacity on the grid or just 24/7 because the residents of the nearby municipality said they don’t want brownouts.

    Fundamentally ai datacenters transform expensive to transmit electricity into cheap to transmit data, financializing what was previously a relatively insulated commodity whose pricing and production reflect local demand into a globally traded commodity whose pricing and production reflect global demand.

    If you don’t have a background in the history of industry and environment: that’s bad news for the environment (and anyone who relies on stable power rates).

    Production of ai computing components requires mining rare earth minerals and phenomenal amounts of power. This is the same process with nearly the same inputs as the production of general purpose computing parts (if you leave off the increased rare earths needed to mitigate electromigration in single digit nanometer processes!) but the increased demand has already brought more fabs up to meet it meaning more use of resources and energy in production before the first kilowatt of inference is run on those chips.

    Turbine blades for datacenter generators are also limited by production and are currently years out for delivery. These are components produced by advanced aerospace manufacturing shops which use massive amounts of energy to shape alloys of metals that have to be yanked out of the ground and smelted into some esoteric type of steel or aluminum first.

    So even without the water concerns datacenters have tremendous impact on the environment.

    But the water concerns are legitimate. Swamp chillers divert flowing water into the air where it is blown anywhere but where it would have flowed. Which is fine if you aren’t downstream of one I guess.

    All this is to say: if you don’t care about the impacts you can rationalize that however you like, but they exist.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 46 points 1 month ago (9 children)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Maybe I am just not understanding your direction based politics, but isn't it the right that put him in office? Isn't your comment backwards?

    To be clear, I literally don't know, it's hard enough following my own country's politics lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 19 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Layoffs aren't the problem here...the problem is that society requires people generate their own worth through work, and suddenly a good chunk of that work is now significantly less valuable.

    Requiring less work is a good thing. Humans should be striving to minimize work. That's what humanity is good at.

    The problem comes in that while the "input" of AI is, essentially, the collection of all human knowledge...while the output is money for a small handful of people...people who themselves contributed next to nothing to that pile of human knowledge (and in fact are probably running a deficit to it).

    That ain't right. We are all shareholders in the collection of all human knowledge. We should all be getting dividends from its work.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago*

    It should be noted that the input of all human knowledge is getting the door closed and locked behind it. Requiring you to buy tokens to access said information.

    And if you refuse to provide more training data to their services that collect said data, like reddit, facebook, x, then you can't access essentially the entire internet. With google locking down captchas to only "verified" android phones. And every website requiring you to sign up with a ID card, and locking you out when you use a VPN.

    So not only will your jobs will be taken away but your autonomy and access to what used to be free information. Or not even information sometimes your job or access to a services requires you to use these things. Even just getting into your apartment with a RFID reader on your apparments official app. You have to exist in their panopitcon just to even exist in many situations.

    Oh and the best part the only thing worth money in the ai industry is all your user data and how it gets fed into palantirs networks. From every single comment you make on their services, and everytime you order a cheese burger in public, that all gets logged because you are a domestic terrorist for thinking maybe we should hold these people accountable.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)