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

  • 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