you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 87 points 2 weeks ago (21 children)

What gets me is that this is roughly the best-case scenario for "capable hands" — Linus knows this codebase better than anyone alive — and a race condition plus a 9% read regression still slipped through on the first attempt. Reviews and testing caught it, which is the system working, but it moves the bottleneck from writing code to reviewing it. And review doesn't scale the way generation does; skimming a patch is quick, but actually proving an LLM-assisted one is correct takes real effort. I say that as someone who uses AI tooling daily — reading code you didn't write is genuinely more tiring than writing it, and that tax compounds the more you lean on generation. The maintainer-burnout angle might end up being the real story here, more than the AI one.

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

    reading code you didn't write is genuinely more tiring than writing it

    What I keep saying. Good take except that you don't use "AI" tooling, you use copyright evasion slop tooling.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    I thought code couldn't be copywritten? It's instructions, isn't it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 weeks ago

    I think it's still murky as far as AI generated code goes. (IIRC You can't, but not sure enough to say so authoritatively)

    But code historically has been very copyright-able. Oracle's business model was mostly buying companies and then suing people for infringing on their newly-acquired IP.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (18 replies)