The role of AI tools (LLMs, mainly) in Linux is under discussion, or it was, until Linus Torvalds “put his foot down” in support of the use of AI in Linux kernel development.
You must log in or register to comment.
Arguing over use of a tool is foolish.
Arguing over correct use of a tool absolutely has merit.
AI as an industry has extremely debatable morality, however you kinda can’t put this genie back in the bottle.
Like him or don’t, his ultimate message of “This shit is here so you may as well learn how to embrace it” isn’t inherently bad either in context of bug-hunting and skilled individuals using the tools as an aid rather than as the alpha and omega solution.
How is this controversial besides coming from the guy who said it?
Some of us perceive benefit in not touching “the shit” and not letting “the shit” get in our environment (computers, phones, lettuce)
There may be no tech way to put the genie into the septic tank, but surely we can’t be forced to deal with it, and until the foot dropped there was a social way to rebottle the genie
This is the correct take, and I kinda hate many things AI is doing.
Lucky we still have OpenBSD.
Just because Linus put his foot down doesn’t mean the discussion is over. Reeks of hero worship. He also said that Linux isn’t political…
it isnt political, its a a kernel
Open source is inherently political.
Everything is intrinsically political. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zruGBWLk9s8
Though some things are more political than others. ;) Free Software’s avowedly a piece of political philosophy. Open Source seems more like corporate(/monopoly/fascist) strategy. Namely, Embrace-Extend-Extinguish.
Can you rephrase those two last sentences? Because I didn’t quite got that.
Embrace-extend-extinguish is when a large company adopts an existing open standard (encouraging users to use its software due to that compatibility) and then extends that standard with proprietary features, rendering software using the open standard incompatible and extinguishing their ability to compete with the larger platform.
but this isnt a foss group or gnu. FSF is very political, linux is not. microsoft is the largest contributor to open source with goigke in second pkace. they bith have many open source projects but dont shate tge same values as FSF. Linux has never pushed that agenda.
linux is literally licensed under the GPL, it is actively pushing that agenda
Oil is a group of hydrocarbons
I think Linus has realized that LLM’s are not going anywhere and can actually be a useful tool if used correctly.
And he is right in that respect. I know Lemmy is very anti-AI, and for good reason. Because we do not NEED it. And heat producing, power and water guzzling datacenters in this time of climate change is absolutely NOT what we need.
Yet I think LLM’s are here to stay. When used as an “employee” you instruct what to do while keeping total control of the code it produces it is actually pretty useful.
However, I really do hope that open weight models keep improving (which they are) and running them locally on midrange gpu’s on your own computer will be the future.
Because the way the big AI companies are doing things now is absolutely not sustainable and I hope they all fail soon.
I know Lemmy is very anti-AI
No, Lemmy isn’t very anti-AI, just very sane.
AI is a tool. If it does the job better than other tools that’s totally okay. It has so much potential to improve lives.
If on the other hand it’s about artificial general intelligence soon™ hallucinations, “we can totally replace all skilled workers”-fairy tales and other “stop using your brains and eat the slob”-bullshit it just needs to die… alongside the
company CEOssnake oil buyers who (not so secretly anymore) dream about getting rid of all those pesky workers they have to pay proper wages.And sadly 99% of the narratives we are constantly fed (and yes, that includes such “See Linus now supports AI! AI’s winning!!” bullshit stories, when it would be the perfect starting point to actually evaluate AI properly just once…) belong to the second category. Because AI companies in their insanity painted themselves into a corner. Their investments are insane, their market models unsustainable and telling the lie that everyone needs to use their AI and get integrated everywhere-even if it makes zero sense- is basically their only way to salvage something from that shitshow.
I’m not sure “sane” is the best word for us generally 😂
But I get your point and agree with it
And heat producing, power and water guzzling datacenters in this time of climate change is absolutely NOT what we need.
I hope it gets more and more optimised and efficient, so it can be used with a local setup. With a normal computer or notebook
in Linux is under discussion
Are you referring to LKML discussion? Or some other metaphysical discussion we should be aware of? Yes. Linus replied in the thread.
It’s not really very surprising point of view.
Looking at it from another angle: how many tons of CO₂ added to the atmosphere or liters of fresh water supplies disrupted is a tolerable price for a better code review? Temperatures during heat waves are exceeding 50°C in India, causing tens thousands of deaths.
Literally a negligible amount of emissions and seems to be the core of their argument. It doesnt make a dent in any of those stats nor does it have any impact on the temp in India. Reminds me of the people who screech over private jets as if banning them will do anything to slow down climate change. Even his own link “The AI built-out is by far the fastest growing energy consumer in the world” undermines his point showing that computing has been the fastest growing industry for years by % increase (its a tiny % of the total) not by actual power increase. The projected 1.5% to 3% of global energy use seems reasonable given how massive computing is in our day to day lives. We are lucky we have something so efficient that is so useful we spend far more energy on far worse things than computers.
