Check out TuxCare's Endless LifeCycle Support for PostgreSQL 14 and more: https://tuxcare.com/endless-lifecycle-support/postgresql-eol-support/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=paid_social&utm_campaign=ELS%20PostgreSQL&utm_term=The%20linux%20experiment

Grab a brand new laptop or desktop running Linux: https://www.tuxedocomputers.com/en#

๐Ÿ‘ SUPPORT THE CHANNEL: Get access to:

  • a Daily Linux News show
  • a weekly patroncast for more thoughts
  • your name in the credits

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@thelinuxexp/join Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thelinuxexperiment

Or, you can donate whatever you want: https://paypal.me/thelinuxexp Liberapay: https://liberapay.com/TheLinuxExperiment/

๐Ÿ‘• GET TLE MERCH Support the channel AND get cool new gear: https://the-linux-experiment.creator-spring.com/

Timestamps: 00:00 Intro 00:36 Sponsor: TuxCare 01:46 KDE's AI policy 06:42 Existing AI policies 10:06 Going further on AI 12:58 My stance on AI 17:05 FOSS projects: yes or no to AI? 28:02 Sponsor: Tuxedo Computers

#linux #linuxdesktop #ai

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

I compare the AI usage to digital photography: where a professional photographer learned how to develop a photo years ago, I assume this is just theoretical knowledge toady. Probably you will learn it in some kind of education but maybe 1 of 100 or even less will do so in practice today. Code might go a similar way - and my question is, whether it is important that humans understand code in a way they do today? In 50 years from now only 1 of 100 developers might be capable to write code, some more might be able to actually read it. But will it matter? Is it really necessary to write code by yourself if the machine eventually is better in most coding disciplines? If the models keep on getting better at coding, my assumption is: yes. Coding is an art not worth investing anymore because it is slow and imprecisecompared to anything what an AI agent will be capable of in the next decades.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [โ€“] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    @alex@eloquer.de Yes it matters for many reasons. First, neuronal networks degenerate without new input. And once they are trained on 99% LLM output, it just takes 10 generations to get garbage out on the level of a child's first words. That is especially true if future models are bound to one or two companies, because nobody else can pay the costs of development or the hardware to run on. That also causes heavily democratic issues. Furthermore the models will be manipulated more and more over time -> enshittification. How can you be sure that it creates the program you want without build-in tracking? And do we have 100% green energy in 50 years (which we require much earlier) or is LLM one of the reasons we could not reach it? In best case it is a bet that "everything will just go right", but the experience in tech with super scaled companies is more that everything will go wrong that could go wrong. What if one of the companies becomes so big, that one or two produce 95% of all software in the world via LLM? It is a highly political topic, not just for "is LLM output still FOSS compatible or not?" (which is not as far as the LLM itself is not 100% FOSS, which is far more than "open weight").

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [โ€“] 1 point 3 weeks ago

    @half@makertube.net Maybe I was a bit "pessimistic" - your arguments are correct. But will it matter to all developers? My take is that there will be less programmers being capable to read and write code. It will be a skill necessary for some but not for all. This new profession might not be a programmer or developer, rather a "software builder" who knows just enough about technology to not produce too much of slop. Note that this is not what I want to happen, it is just what I assume, based on what I see in the industry and on my personal experiments and the way previous technological revolutions worked out and some fantasy. ;)

  • source
  • parent