Linux

I have mixed opinions on his stance towards AI.

I confess, I’m guilty. I’ve used AI to diagnose random issues with my little personal blog (please don’t hate me, I’m just a man without a degree). That said, I understood the simple code well enough to see what I was getting wrong and comprehend the AI generated suggestion, so it wasn’t all that different than looking things up on a wiki and implementing it. The primary difference, for me, was that I had already spent two weeks digging deeper and deeper for my answers, only finding outdated or incorrect information, and Claude delivered the correct answer in about 10 seconds.

In my opinion, the reason it was a good idea to implement the AI generated code was that I understood it. There was a human brain looking at that result and going “aha! I see what I was missing!” If I hadn’t understood what I was looking at, it could have been doing anything, and I wouldn’t have felt comfortable implementing it. If I hadn’t at least tried to the old fashioned way first, I wouldn’t have used it. But after weeks of hitting dead ends and with the knowledge that there was an extremely powerful tool that could give me my answer in seconds, it began to feel foolish to continue punishing myself with wasted time.

In Linus’ case, I think it is safe to say he understands enough about Linux to interpret the AI suggestions and be a safeguard against slop. I’m not too concerned about his contributions to the kernel if he’s using AI to think outside the box or diagnose a complicated problem.

But! There is a major risk factor when people start implementing code that they don’t understand, or when it is a crutch for their total lack of comprehension. Vibe coding and using a diagnostic tool are different things. I hope Linus gives some real thought to the realistic limits that need to be in place for people who aren’t knowledgeable enough to filter AI suggested code through their own brains, because it wouldn’t take long to destroy a reliable system like Linux if they incorporate AI generated code with no experienced human in the drivers seat.

Apologies to those who just fundamentally hate AI and think I’m a fool for using it, I just wanted to share my experience as an unschooled computer nerd who finally gave in and tried it out a couple of times.

Strangely idgaf about whether he respects me

What is stupid is referring to AI as if it was just one tool when actually it's a bunch of tools, some of which are easier to use sensibly amd some it's near impossible to. Fancy auto complete like it's being compared to sure, fully automated do what the fuck you want agents, yeah sooner or later that is going to go wrong and no one is going to know where or why.

They might be fun and interesting, that doesn't make it a great idea to go all in in my opinion, certainly not for anything you would consider important.

Fully agree with Linux.

Ai is a tool. Learn how to properly use it or not use it like you prefer, it's a goddamn tool.

If you are a bad coder you will still be a bad coder using AI. If you are a good coder, you will be a faster good coder with AI.

It's a fucking tool.

Genuine question. I'm not a developer, I didn't study computer science, and I'm a pretty basic Fedora user. But why does everyone harp on Linus Torvald's opinions like they're handed down from heaven? Windows still dominates the market, but no one cares what Bill Gates says. I love A Song of Ice and Fire but I wouldn't take writing tips from George R. R. Martin. Richard Stallman's opinions on GNU/Linux are memed endlessly. Linus is literally just a dude.

This is really an ignorant and arrogant take at AI.

My understanding is that AI/LLMs can generate code that works, but often that code is more bloated/convoluted than code written by a decent coder, making it less efficient and more difficult to maintain. I can see that being acceptable for many in situations where hardware/performance/maintainability aren’t a concern like a one-off app or proof of concept. But for something as low level as a kernel I would think that performance and maintainability are the most important things since slowdown in that part of the system ripples up to affect everything a user does anywhere in the operating system.

I understand that a skilled coder can take AI output and clean it up into something at least approaching the quality of their own unassisted code, and I’ve been led to believe that Linus is able to do that for himself. But I fear that other/future maintainers of Linux won’t match that caliber, and it will start to feel that AI bloat. I think I’ve also read of Linus complaining about a torrent of low-quality, AI-based submissions and so I also fear that this will lead to him restricting who can participate in the work, overcompensate, and end up in a situation where Linux becomes less open and more closed.

My last use of AI is in my post history and was fairly down voted because I was being foolishly ironic.

This said, I don't really disagree with his take here despite keeping away from AI as much as I am reasonably able. I do my own critical thinking and hate that I have to jump through hoops on the internet to have a simple question answered without some layman's AI summary that may or may not be even remotely correct or actionable. Even still, when I asked it to check on local real estate laws and provide summaries of possible actions based on a very strict set of parameters, it gave me information that my wife and I were able to bring to a human agent and have things work out better than we had actually expected.

I think a better way of putting it - and I'm still gonna ruffle feathers - is that AI is becoming the new electricity.

Put down your pitchfork and lemme explain.

When electricity came out, people rather reasonably pointed out that simply coming into contact with an electrical device could result in death if one wasn't careful. On top of that, the infrastructure required for it was expensive, unsightly, and at the time incredibly disruptive to daily life. It was going to ruin and disrupt entire industries that had existed for centuries because it could do things a human could not do unaided.

All of this is to one degree or another entirely true even through to modern times, but electricity has become a ubiquitous resource that humanity would now deeply struggle to live without. I won't dare compare AI that far as i genuinely believe humans would be significantly better off without it, but the initial Luddite response to electricity has a historical echo here.

I think Linus' point is more that it can undoubtedly be a useful tool when used in a measured, controlled, intelligent manner, and that it is a genie that is very clearly unwilling to be put back in its bottle. Like it or not it exists, and while we can absolutely be unhappy about it, being blind to its actual real world beneficial uses because the companies that make it are actual festering waste is a bit silly - especially when in the hands of the right chaotic neutral parties these companies are about to have a massive lesson in just how messy their tools have made things.

heartbreaking: this Finnish nationalist is saying some good stuff