There appears to be a few bad actors in the Lemmy community spreading ragebait for personal gain

In fact, the same mechanisms added at the beginning to catch bad human written code are the exact same that catch bad AI code

  1. No, the Linux kernel won’t use AI to auto approve code for inclusion. And no plans to do so
  2. The Kernel actually has a huge number of maintainers. As part of the process, all patches are reviewed by a human who provide feedback as part of the process, and patches get bounced back and forth multiple time.
  3. Patches don’t just magically go straight to master. The maintainers generally have their own branches where it goes to, then it goes to staging trees like Linux-Next. It goes through many eyes, and many tests by the end. The idea that AI code is overrunning the kernel is rediculous
  4. Maintainers also check that the code meets coding guidelines and is written properly, and solves the problem they are trying to solve. Yes, they also ensure the code isn’t slop
  5. LLM’s though might be used to identify obvious problems (bugs / coding guideline issues) with the code. These don’t generate “slop” just find issues
  6. The only thing that matters is the human who submitted the code, as they should be checking the code submitted anyway (including LLM generated code).

Writing bad code isn’t something new, and isn’t unique to LLM’s. Coders (and it seems some “journalists”) have been writing slop since computers were invented.

The process hasn’t gotten less stringent (probably even MORE stringent as there is an additional set of robotic eyes that can also check), and the same mechanisms that were put in place to catch badly written code 10 years ago, are still there now

    • Shin@piefed.socialEnglish
      11·
      16 hours ago

      Hey thanks for the extra engagement. But you clearly haven’t read the blog, which is beyond stupid when linking to another topic.

      This is a quote from the blog regarding my respects for the maintainers. And I deeply respect then.

      […] We are talking about smart people with a genuine passion for hardware and enough time to learn a genuinely hard language. […]

      So @one_knight_scripting@lemmy.world if you have EVER read the blog you would know my respect for the project. Stop spreading missinformation.

      I NEVER said that the problem was on the LLM usage, on the contrary, my focus is on the other part of the statement. Another quote from the blog, regarding the phrase used.

      Linux is not one of those anti-AI projects, and if somebody has issues with that, they can do the open-source thing and fork it. […]
      Then he says this…

      Sure, the social angle of working on open source is important and often a very motivating part of the project, but in the end that’s a side benefit, not the point of the project.

      This is NOT some kind of “social warrior” project, never has been, and never will be.1

      The first quote is a tantrum. The second one is the problem, and it’s bigger than he seems to realize.

      […]

      The vibe coder panic is a distraction. The real trouble is the other half of the sentence

      I highlighted the part that bothered me enough to write about it, since you probably need help to understand words in a blog @one_knight_scripting@lemmy.world

      So stop the missinformation. Want to attack me, feel free. Do it, I couldn’t care less. But spreading wrong or missinformation, this is the point were I think a community can’t accept.

      Have a nice day, and thanks for the extra link for the blog, helps with the engagement.

      • one_knight_scripting@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        9 hours ago

        Right… Go ahead… Explain again how you are reducing the over twenty years of work that Linus has done for the Linux community to a “political tool”. And yet I’m the one spreading misinformation? Right.

        • Shin@piefed.socialEnglish
          1·
          9 hours ago

          What are you talking about?

          Linus contribution is here, I respect then. If this isn’t clear.

          […] We are talking about smart people with a genuine passion for hardware and enough time to learn a genuinely hard language. […]

          GPL is a political manifesto, so software is political, and the usage of “social warrior” slang goes on a specific direction. Which again is political. And my question. There is nothing regarding the LLM usage, and this wasn’t the focus.

          So please read the blog post and stop spreading missinformation. You are doing a bad service to this community.

          • one_knight_scripting@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            7 hours ago

            GPL is not a political manifesto. It is a license.

            I think you are injecting a lot of politics into that entire mailing list because of the social warrior wording. But the man has the right to defend a decision he made… About his software… In a mailing list… About his software. And as a leader it is his goal to keep his team on the same page, so I thought it was really well written: https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-Is-Not-Anti-AI.

            Why exactly does social warrior bother you so much? Is that seriously all it was to make all the accusations and insinuations in your blog post?

            The moment you pick the term “social warrior”, you are already in politics…That isn’t neutrality.

            You insinuate that he took bribes, or did I read that wrong to?

            Maybe he’s being paid to be nice to a specific company. There is a lot of money in this world, and there isn’t a stack left that doesn’t want to influence Linux.

            No?

            I can’t prove it, and I hope I’m wrong.

            Again, it seems to me like you are trying to discredit the founder of Linux and thus Linux as a whole. I think you are trying to sow discontent where there is none and using the word choice of “social warrior” to do so. I don’t see any valuable insight in the entire blog post just a bunch of accusations/insinuations directed at a man I respect. Based on what exactly? Word choice and Marxism? What a fucking load. He does not deserve to have his code, contributions, and decades of work boiled down to ‘a political tool’. The philosophical ideas to support your own conclusions are so stretched and twisted that it seems to me like you’ve invented a whole new way to be afraid of something.

    • auzy1@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      11·
      13 hours ago

      I was actually thinking Pivot To AI, who seems to maintain a shitty blog, patreon (of course) and even a Lemmy community (where you seemingly get banned without debate if you disagree with them… And then abused after you can banned). Rather than doing any actual programming it looks like, they just write articles attacking programmers.

      That’s actually why I wrote this, as I felt there was no right of reply, and I suspect he was knowingly providing deceptive information for personal gain, financial gain and attention. At the very least, banning someone, and then abusing them after they can’t comment/respond is so childish lol

      The implication he seemed to be making too (or that his readers seemed to gather it seems), was that the recent changes would mean that kernel code potentially goes straight through AI to the kernel… And that is a blatant lie that has deviated so far from the truth. There was seemingly no attempt in that article (the parts I read) on educating how the process works

      There are so many completely valid arguments that could be made against AI, so, it’s completely unnecessary for him to deceive, spread misinformation and bullshit people. Either that, or he needs to actually learn what the fuck he’s talking about