19
I'm late to the party, it would seem (piefed.blahaj.zone)
submitted 8 months ago by to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 16 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 17 points 8 months ago (2 children)

There is no way Linus or the other maintainers are allowing unverified code into the kernel.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 4 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    That's not the whole issue.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago

    It is for most people. You are welcome to create your own issues in life if you wish. But Linus Torvalds is infamous for his meticulous, detailed, thorough, and often expletive-laden code reviews, and if he is willing to review AI-generated or AI-assisted code that's entirely up to him, there is no indication he is willing to lower his coding standards one iota. He trusts his maintainers not to bring him any shitty AI code, but he's giving them the freedom to make that choice themselves. If they abuse it, he will punish them. There's no doubt if you know anything about how the Linux kernel development process works.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 10 points 8 months ago

    Here’s an article that discusses llm use on the Linux kernel: https://lwn.net/Articles/1026558/

    It’s a little older, but it might help to ground the conversation a bit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 7 points 8 months ago (9 children)

    Where have you seen LLM generated code being merged into the kernel?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 6 points 8 months ago (8 children)
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (7 children)

    Did you read Linus’ response on the mailing list? From that linked article

    https://lwn.net/ml/all/CAHk-=wj3fQVEcAqy82JnrX2KKi4NjnEGGSH2Pf_ztnLCcveWkQ@mail.gmail.com/

    Given his sole control over what gets merged, thats all that matters.

    also note hes discussing ai as a tool for reviewing patches. nothing about ai actually writing code.

    make of that what you will

    I have not yet seen any evidence of actual ai slop code being merged into the kernel

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 5 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    Linux, of all projects, should be opposed to these kind of things as a whole. Sure, we could argue it's not as bad, but I'm not comforted by that statement. The fact that those in charge don't see or care about the obvious problems is shocking.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

    Im not trying to say one way or the other, or take anyone’s side here.

    just putting into context “ai generated code in the linux kernel” isnt whats currently happening.

    unless you have evidence otherwise.

    edit - KDEs response maybe clarifies “ai” to me in this discussion.

    We agree and we agree with many of your objections. AI has become a synonym of tech irresponsibility, greed and exploitation, like crypto was before it. The difference is AI existed before the current craze and pursued legitimate goals. That is still happening in some areas of AI research and ignoring all uses of AI would be throwing the baby out with the bath water.

    LLM providers like OpenAI are scum. But the general technology around “ai” isnt as bad as that

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 6 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Right. Sorry, I'll try to make the post clearer bc I'm not trying to mislead anyone, I'm just so upset that this is even being entertained by Linux devs, it's boiling my blood.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Just edited my reply for context. Hopefully it explains at least my personal view.

    LLMs provided by billionaire techbros? Burn that shit to the ground.

    The scientific idea and application of ai when its helpful and relevant I dont see a problem.

    The difference being no vibe coded ai generated bullshit ends up in the kernel. The use of this technology elsewhere can be completely fine, if its treated correctly.

    But Im totally on your side with “openai llm vibe coded slop should never ever land in the kernel”. And I trust linus on that. given his history with regular 100% human maintainers, he wouldnt let that garbage slide.

    “ai” as a term has become synonymous with openai, anthropic, gemini. theyre just LLM products sold by companies. They should never be near real critical production systems. But the wider scientific/technology side could be applied ethically - without using those LLM products

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    I like your thought process, but struggle to agree with you because I don't believe there is a way for this kind of technology to be ethical without being rebooted (haha) from the ground up. Even so, about the only thing I think it should be used for is double checking what humans have already done, or perhaps printing text from human speech for quick and dirty subtitles. However, all that is assuming that the data it is working off of was not stolen, and that it is not able to "generate" anything "new" because that's just theft and exploitation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago*

    Youre right in it needing to be rebooted, and thats sort of what im getting at. The technical side (the idea of how models work) is fine. Problem is big companies fed it with stolen content. And instead of optimising its performance they instead decided to burn even more of our environment.

    I wholeheartedly agree that is evil.

    But assume an entirely “untrained LLM” - its fed with truly proven open source, willingly contributed information, which then runs locally? I think thats ok.

    Double checking the output - thats absolutely correct. I work in software development. I have dabbled with ai code tools. I would not let them ever touch my projects directly. Using one as a sounding board was slightly helpful. but knowing the cost and impact of these models currently, its not worth it.

    Use gallons of water, and a dozen trees to feed the plagiarism machine to do my job for me? Never ever. fuck that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Could you link to an article or a write up on the stuff you're referencing so I can look into it more, please?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •