327
Linus Torvalds says Linux kernel is out of 'stabilization phase' and using 'much healthier model' for AI contributions (www.theregister.com)
submitted 5 days ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
179 comments fedilink hide all child comments
πŸ’© 1
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -5 points 5 days ago (45 children)

For anybody confuse about why Torvalds is suddenly such a slopper it's because AI companies pumped millions into the Linux Foundation which gives him a paycheck.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 45 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 4 days ago (39 children)

    what makes what the article describes slop?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 39 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 4 days ago (38 children)

    Way too many people just equate any form of LLM/agentic/AI with pure slop.

    As a tech lead who has to review a lot of code: those who did shit without LLM do shit with it. Those who are good without, are good with it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 38 child comments
    •
  • [–] 28 points 4 days ago* (26 children)

    I've found that the quality of code produced by my team has dropped significantly since my org pushed everyone to use LLMs. "Let me throw an agent at it" usually means "here's another headache of a PR for me to review." Engineers with decades of experience are writing such utter fucking crap now, and it doesn't matter how many docs I write for their fuckass agents to ingest, the quality doesn't seem to be getting better. They can make their agent loop on it for functionality/bug and hallucination squashing, but that usually just means I get a bloated fucking mess to review. It's miserable and it makes me want to go shovel actual hog shit.

    Sincerely,

    a very sad and tired senior dev who used to enjoy his job

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 4 days ago (1 child)

    If they push shit, I push back. It's a tool they can use, not an excuse. Creating rules for the agent is fine, but that's only a soft guardrail.

    We don't have a mandate to use LLMs, if things are worse with them then we won't use them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 days ago

    I'm trying to adjust expectations. You aren't getting my approval unless you can explain why each part is there. Your poor planning is not my emergency. K.I.S.S. still applies.

    Admittedly, this is easier to say as a senior whose opinion is respected within the company.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 4 days ago (22 children)

    As a senior dev... AI actually improved the code we wrote in my last job. Mind you the codebase was in a shite position (tons of technical debt, plague-like avoidance of inline comments because "all of that knowledge is on Jira/Notion" except it wasn't; lots of legacy code, undocumented weird behaviours, everyone was doing their own coding style without regards to the rest of the codebase and so on).

    With controlled AI contributions, we've managed to:

    • refactor large chunks of code where the overall high level logic didn't need to change, but the underlying tooling did (e.g. lots of UI layers got rewritten from a very early attempt at a standardised MVVM approach to a well defined MVI one, we've also managed to eliminate the remaining RxJava/RxKotlin legacy flows to replace them with Coroutines)
    • UI layers got refactored in no time because the AI agent was able to convert them appropriately (and even fixed a handful of UI bugs)
    • a handful of core monoliths (yes I know... I hated working with them as well, but we never had the chance to properly refactor) got split up into more manageable, vertical-specific domain controllers without breaking
    • the elimination of a legacy overarching component that was estimated at 6 months, got reduced to 6 weeks
    • unit test coverage skyrocketed because even if the code was hand-written, an agent would provide coverage, based not just on implementation but on intention (and adoption of TDD/BDD finally started spreading).

    Meanwhile code quality improved because we've had well established patterns and styles defined in the agent instructions, and even the anti-documentation "pragmatists" got shut up when they finally understood that the AI works better if there's fucking comments to explain what's going on

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago (21 children)

    What you've done is allowed an unethical and incompetent machine create an unmaintainable technical debt which will destroy the future of the codebase or the company, because you were all lazy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 4 days ago (11 children)

    It sounds more like you didn't even read his comment and are just rabidly spewing anti-AI talking points instead of participating in the discussion.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 days ago (9 children)

    He let AI refactor his entire codebase because the team didn't understand each other's techniques/approach and nobody had any time or knowledge to do the work themselves. They literally did not understand how it worked so they asked the chatbot to redo it and now they still don't understand it but it appears to them as if it was improved.

    What did you read?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (8 children)

    Literally every single statement you made includes an assumption that the work wasn't checked and that nobody has any idea what it changed.

    Yes, slop exists, but one-shotting without review is not how most people use the tools.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (7 children)

    IDGAF if a slopper is checking the slop. Since 2022 the number of bugs and exploits has exploded dramatically and code is measurably worse: because people do not understand code that they did not write.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago (5 children)

    You do realise that most of those bugs and exploits aren't from AI generated code (a good chunk has existed for years before LLMs were even a wet thought), and the number is mainly exploding because LLMs are being used to identify them, right?

    Take the highly coveted, human audited OS OpenBSD. 30+ years of code, deemed to be the most secure, most closely watched and verified on the planet... And a simple LLM check identifies not one, not two, but three (by my last count, this could've increased since, I don't follow OpenBSD that closely) major, exploitable issues that humans have missed for years.

    But sure, slop.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago (4 children)

    You do realise that most of those bugs and exploits aren’t from AI generated code (a good chunk has existed for years before LLMs were even a wet thought), and the number is mainly exploding because LLMs are being used to identify them, right?

    I think that's the lie you're being fed, mate. Sure, some of these old existing exploits have been identified by these multibillion dollar tech companies, but we've well documented that AI slop coders produce terribly unsecure code and far more than their peers.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 days ago (3 children)

    Ah yes the lie being fed to me, aka having seen a lot of the exploits, as well as their RCAs clearly pointing to human written code. Unless you suggest that these AI companies have discovered time travel and are sending back their LLMs in time a la Terminator, but instead of killing John Connor, they're just... injecting slop before LLMs were a thing. Which is obviously a ridiculous notion.

    Yes, actual slop - code never reviewed by a human, having no actual maintainer, etc. - can have major security issues. Today, considerably less than, say, a year ago. Reality is, most slopware is either abandoned in no time, or, the less likely option, get traction, get more people working on it, and over time, become less sloppy as people take ownership of various parts.

    Meanwhile, an overwhelming part of the IT industry now utilises AI with humans in the loop. We are actually in the phase of the "find out and oh fuck backtrack on it" part of the whole "let's fire engineers because a manager with AI can do the work of a department" idea backfired spectacularly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago* (2 children)

    Today, considerably less than, say, a year ago.

    Every day it gets worse with you fuckin sloppers always slopping out garbage putting countless people and industries at risk with your worthless non-expertise. If you haven't gotten the hint yet, I don't respect you, you've already stated multiple lies to our faces in this discussion.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 days ago

    I have not stated a single lie here.

    You, however, started out with an emotional outburst and has refused to even read and understand my replies. That makes this entire discussion pointless, and I refuse to waste energy on the likes of you.

    As for respect... why would I care what a laughable chud luddite wannabe, a mid-40s loser who can't keep up with the world and blames everyone but himself, someone who's peaked before they turned 20, thinks about me? You've provided great entertainment for a few hours, and the saddest part is, that's probably the most useful you've been in the past decade.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 4 days ago (7 children)

    Please shut the fuck up if you have no inkling about what you're talking about.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 4 days ago (1 child)

    On the one hand that would be nice, but on the other hand it would result in basically no content on social media any more.

    Actually, no, I'm on board with this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 days ago

    Hey now, not all of us are spouting nonsense constantly. I for one tend to research topics - even if in a cursory manner (and no that does not mean I use Cursor or other AI as my main information source, before another anti-AI shitwit accuses me of doing so). And I tend to stick to topics I have at least a cursory understanding of, to begin with.

    Should that not be the case, I'll try to join the discussion with questions. Problem is, what I consider the basics of a discussion worth having - that is, being informative, with the goal of education, sharing knowledge - seems to be too much effort for most.

    However what I can't stand is the aforementioned shitwits joining a level headed discussion only to barf in a half-digested word salad based on nothing but their emotions. If I wanted to debate based on emotions, I'd go to a reality show community...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 4 days ago (4 children)

    Eat my ass slopper

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago (3 children)

    Yeeeeeah, not gonna listen to some fuckwit who immediately launches into an unprompted tirade without even reading what they reply to.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago* (2 children)

    "Please shut the fuck up if you have no inkling about what you’re talking about."

    Oh I'm sorry did I not enter this discussion with enough civility?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (10 children)

    Being β€œgood with it” doesn’t negate the overwhelming harms it causes. Those harms are part of the slop: environmental slop, work environment slop, societal degradation slop.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] -4 points 4 days ago (5 children)

    The invention of electricity also did a tremendous amount of harm. Should we have also just tried to put it back in its box?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 4 days ago* (4 children)

    Electricity allows us to perform otherwise impossible logistics, medical care, heating, countless beneficial technologies, and longer operation hours in industry.

    Without AI... what? More jobs, cheaper utilities, lower polution? In the future it might be able to lie to you sightly more efficiently while funneling control of industry into the hands of a dozen wealthy elites.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 4 days ago (3 children)

    None of that was true when it was first invented, it killed many people caused house fires etc.

    We don't know yet all the uses of AI, but we're going to find out despite how many people on the fediverse crash out at the mention of AI

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

    When it was first invented it literally brought light to the streets and phased out TORCHES.

    Do you understand what a TORCH is?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    Torches? TORCHES????

    My dude, you seriously believe electric lights went mainstream during medieval times? Which would be pretty much the last period where any place used primarily torches for street lighting...

    At the very best it phased out gas lights. Not torches.

    You really have zero idea no matter the topic, but you're so confidently un-knowledgeable, you've managed to convince yourself that you know everything.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 days ago (3 children)

    Is that a fact or just a suspicion? Because I don't see you providing any sources for that.
    Don't get me wrong I suspect so myself, but I wouldn't make such a claim without backing it up.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 4 days ago (2 children)

    https://www.linuxfoundation.org/press/linux-foundation-announces-12.5-million-in-grant-funding-from-leading-organizations-to-advance-open-source-security

    "SAN FRANCISCO – March 17, 2026 – The Linux Foundation, the nonprofit organization enabling mass innovation through open source, today announced $12.5 million in total grants from Anthropic, AWS, GitHub, Google, Google DeepMind, Microsoft, and OpenAI to strengthen the security of the open source software ecosystem. The funding will be managed by Alpha-Omega and the Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF), trusted security initiatives within the Linux Foundation, to develop long-term, sustainable security solutions that support open source communities worldwide."

    Immediately after this announcement Linus was suddenly a lot less critical of AI.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •