422
Linus Torvalds used AI to fix a Linux bug, and now LLM critics on Linux face an uncomfortable choice (www.xda-developers.com)
submitted 6 days ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
496 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2026/08/msg00041.html

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 83 points 6 days ago (25 children)

I’m glad Linus is pragmatic about this, ethical questions aside LLM’s are a highly valuable tool in software development and they are likely to continue to improve. Any engineer fighting the use of LLM’s will ultimately find that their peers are achieving more in a shorter time then they are. Open weight LLM’s have also come a long way and are already good enough for daily use.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 32 child comments
    •
  • [–] 133 points 6 days ago (4 children)

    ethical questions aside

    And his here is the problem. Oh yeah lets just waive off the biggest critisicm on and issue of AI.

    Hitler was a pretty neat guy, ethnic cleansing aside.

    And before you say this, no, i am not comparing you to hitler, I'm only using an over the top example to hopefully make my point more clear.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 5 days ago (3 children)

    I think the better analogy is, the advances in rocketry made under hitler were pretty neat and just because Hitler was an evil guy who did evil shit doesn't mean we should have thrown that away. By all means stop giving money and influence to the big AI companies, but the advances made can still be repurposed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 5 days ago

    Yes so of course my actual opinion is a little more nuanced than this. I absolutely see the uses of AI, I won't deny that. I just fundamentally disagree with the way it is being used right now (by which I mean the gas-turbine-powered datacenters it requires, the noise pollution they create, the unethical/outright illegal acquiring of training data.

    If you're using a local model, whose training did not deprive actual people of huge amounts of water or electricity, and did not use stolen data, I'm all for it. But most people aren't, they're using ChatGPT or Gemini or whatever Microsoft is making.

    Continuing your analogy, this would be like flying rockets manufactured by the third reich, not other companies using the same technologies.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 5 days ago* (1 child)

    The main difference is that rockets are expressly for the purpose of murdering people, so I would argue that the research shouldn't be continued or done at all.

    Fortunately I'm pretty sure that people developing these computer programs are serious about trying not to murder people - even if just for legal reasons.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -9 points 5 days ago (1 child)

    "Ai is literally Hitler"

    -fediverse user, 2026

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -18 points 5 days ago (1 child)

    I’m only using an over the top example to hopefully make my point more clear.

    If that's the only example available that illustrates the point, then you have not spent enough time thinking through your idea.

    Do better.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 5 days ago (1 child)

    Do better.

    lmao fuck off

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 5 days ago (1 child)

    Thanks for admitting you haven't got a legitimate argument.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 5 days ago (1 child)

    "I don't like your example, give me a different one."

    "No."

    "Checkmate libtard. So much for the tolerant left."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 5 days ago (1 child)

    ROFL.

    Thanks for admitting you have no idea what you're talking about. Again.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 5 days ago

    Maybe you should fully read what you're looking at before posting next time. I'm not the person you were whining to originally.

    It's a bad look when you can't even tell who it is you're talking to. Really makes it seem like you have no idea what you're talking about.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 51 points 5 days ago (3 children)

    Any engineer fighting the use of LLM’s will ultimately find that their peers are achieving more in a shorter time then they are.

    How do you measure that?

    I am asking because I tried all the AI coding tools (copilot, cursor, claude code, etc.), even the paid versions, to find the utopia that doubles my productivity where lots of people are talking about. But everytime I find they take more time to generate code than me typing it, they rarely get things right the first time, they produce way more code than needed (which is much more to reason about) and all in all it takes longer to achieve something using "AI" instead of doing it on my own.

    The worst results are the ones that seem to be correct, but can only be found incorrect on closer inspection. For instances, a part of my job is to write data collection applications for sensors; those sensors come with a datasheet (usually 100 to 200 pages) that explain how to "talk" to the sensor. Sounds perfect for an LLM - throw the datasheet in, get a small C application out. But either I get something that does not even compile, or something that seems to collect data, but configures the sensor completely wrong. Debugging that takes more time than just working through the datasheet myself and program it myself.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 5 days ago

    Yeah, my work is forcing us to use Claude for everything now. More than ever, I'm convinced that using AI is slower and worse than me just doing it by hand.

    UNLESS, if I blindly accept the output, then Claude is faster. Sure, I can close the ticket in 15 minutes. Is it right? Idk. Is it good? Idk. Does it have bugs? Idk. Did it make shit up? Idk. Did anything even get compiled or tested? Idk. The ticket is closed though and that's all that matters, apparently.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 5 days ago*

    How do you measure that?

    The other day I did a google search for a basic JavaScript function. Gemini gave me almost the exact function that I needed. Should I have closed my eyes or smashed my head with a hammer until I forgot? Ofc I used it. It was the first result, helpful, and easy.

    I don't believe in "AI" since it doesn't exist, but these augmented or summarized searches can definitely be helpful. I imagine it's the same with other LLMs, search engines, etc.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 5 days ago* (1 child)

    Well that's because copilot and cursor are pure shit, and claude code is overpriced and over rated.

    TBH I have been hopping between agent frameworks, but mostly I use locally run Qwen or Deepseek to draft individual function blocks or brainstorm in a notepad interface:

    https://github.com/lmg-anon/mikupad

    And manually insert them as I review the code... I like my stuff uncomplicated and unobstructed.

    If I were to pick an API provider today, I'd buy one year of Xiaomi MiMo, because it is dirt cheap and good enough. GLM and Deepseek are great, but more expensive since they are popular now.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 5 days ago (1 child)

    They are really not that distinct, all the models cheat off each other just like they cheat copyrights.

    The entire premise of chatbots is to have a simple natural-language interface instead of those scary GUIs and programming languages. The idea that maybe they didn't know enough about how to interact with ai, and that's why it failed to help them, is a little silly, and the more you explain how we're all using ai wrong, the sillier you look.

    You've obviously sunk a lot of costs into genai, both in time and money, and that is making you defensive. Somebody that isn't impressed by Claude premium isn't going to do any of what you suggest, let alone get any more value out of it, and that's valid for them. You're not seriously interested in helping them professionally, you are just insecure.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 5 days ago* (1 child)

    I dispute all of this

    The entire premise of chatbots is to have a simple natural-language interface instead of those scary GUIs and programming languages.

    Absolutely not. This is not what text models were made for, it's what jerks like Altman and Modi twisted them into with marketing.

    The idea that maybe they didn’t know enough about how to interact with ai, and that’s why it failed to help them, is a little silly, and the more you explain how we’re all using ai wrong, the sillier you look.

    I'm not blaming the user, I'm saying they're crap services. I think the superlative/cursing is necessary here; they are so bad and enshittified it is astounding.

    You’ve obviously sunk a lot of costs into genai, both in time and money, and that is making you defensive.

    I have paid a total of a few bucks into APIs, I've never had a Claude or OpenAI subscription in my life. I don't know why you would assume this.

    Somebody that isn’t impressed by Claude premium isn’t going to do any of what you suggest, let alone get any more value out of it, and that’s valid for them. You’re not seriously interested in helping them professionally, you are just insecure.

    I'm not insecure about this. I don't need LLMs or generative ML, though I am interested in it. I have many dire personal issues, but people are free to program however they wish and I'm not going to gaslight anyone about that.

    I do think text models have been bastardized into "a simple natural-language interface instead of those scary GUIs and programming languages." That is NOT what they were intended to do, no matter how much Claude tries to sell people on it. I think this misunderstanding is extremely important because it's exactly what's propping up abominations/scams like OpenAI/Anthropic.

    But they can still be extremely useful tools in narrower scopes, like all machine learning has for over a decade, and I'm not going to shy away advocating for that. I do resent all of LLMs being pigeonholed so tightly, and if people are going to try them, I at least want to point them to a more reasonable/frugal source than Claude premium and Claude Code.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 5 days ago (1 child)

    Evangelizing llms is pretty much all you do on here, you have spent an enormous amount of time and effort on them. If you're not even willing to accept that you have sunk costs relating to genai, your stating "I'm not insecure about this" is really not compelling.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 5 days ago*

    Evangelizing llms is pretty much all you do on here, you have spent an enormous amount of time and effort on them.

    This is a fair point. I talk about it a lot here, too much TBH.

    Sorting by New Comments, topics like this are mostly what come up and peak my interest... I suppose I need to curate/moderate my Lemmy feed, like I've been telling myself I should do for some time.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 28 points 5 days ago (3 children)

    I remember people being angry at IDEs for making programming too easy and belittling code colourization as for children.

    There will always be a crowd that wants everything to stay the way they know it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 5 days ago

    It's usually the illiterate that proclaim the sharpest opinions too. Linus is very steady and rational on this, he sees the operator as responsible and the real author. Which is I think how it should be. It reminds me of piracy debates in early internet. You have to be insane to think it is possible to prevent the use of a tool that you could just use and not say you used. It's just futile and honestly just a counter psychosis of the same polarized issue. I just wanna tell both sides: Its not really a debate, because nobody is in charge or could ever enforce a decision either way. It's also a form of privilegium overload to just think we can legislate or de-arm this knowledge and hunt the users down. It is an extreme position to think that it isn't going to continue existing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

    find that their peers are achieving more in a shorter time then they are

    I've been reading this for 3 years and all I've seen so far is my peers making more work for me by going on wild goose chases and making me wade through slop. I do believe there are ways to use it responsibly and productively but that is definitely not what is happening on average.

    I don't understand why so many people decided to take "LLMs increase productivity" as an axiom instead of using their fucking eyes and looking at what is happening around them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (18 replies)