Good. There will be choice.
post
Ubuntu: The Windows of Linux.
5-10 years from now they will pull their Windows 11-equivalent crash and burn move
Canonical the Microsoft linux
The article is good, but the headline seems clickbaity:
-
Debian is discussing requirements about hosting software with LLM generated code in their repos, and disclosure of that.
-
"Ubuntu embraces AI" is talking about putting ML inference engines in their repos... which, ironically, are largely human written.
These are two completely seperate issues. And TBH its not clear how Debian is approaching inference engines or how Ubuntu is approaching disclosure.
I hate ai as much as the next person, but I'd have a different mandate. I would require all code to be fully reviewed and understood by a human. Let's call it quality control.
Agreed. It's not sensible or practical to ban AI, and Linus is right. Why is Linus right? Take a look at the number of Linux CVEs being patched over time. In 2022-23, that was about 300 per year. Last year it was 5530. This is almost entirely as a result of AI scanning tools, including Copy Fail priv escalation that was there for 8 years. The security apocalypse is just about arrived, and the most recent round of cyber models coming out do this way better than before. The Hugging Face incident story was truly unbelievable if you read / watch the details, a historic event. Everything is about to get hacked. So it'll be all about maintainers being reactive to this new reality and burden for some time to come
There is a difference between using AI scanning tools and generating code for production
The Hugging Face incident story was truly unbelievable if you read / watch the details
It didn't really seem that way? Leaving containment seemed more like a configuration oversight than a skill on the part of the model. Accessing HF involved an 0-day but the commentary I saw didn't indicate that it was a next generation hack.
Given that AI exists, and can scan or otherwise find vulnerabilities, maintainers must do so because threat actors inevitably will.
It remains to be seen whether the whole race will improve security generally? I imagine not?
And also have high readability standards, ideally higher than before LLMs.
Read the article, that is one of the two options they are voting on.
Canonical patronizingly forcing a tool/workflow onto users against their explicit and unequivocal rejection of it?

Ubuntu has a long and storied history of making bad decisions. Why should AI be any different?
There's nothing about Ubuntu's proposed use of AI that seems bad at all. Using it to improve accessibility is a good thing, especially when it's open source, local-only, and sandboxed. I can't see how having high quality speech-to-text would be a bad decision. Much of that stuff is probably not even considered "AI" by most people.
Arch users are forced to write their own AI?
I remember when they wanted to unify mobile phones and desktop computers, with a singular online storage account and DE that changed when you plugged your phone into a monitor. That shit was crazy.
I still want that
My parents are coming over today because their ZorinOS installation suddenly started acting up after an Ubuntu Kernel update. Thanks Ubuntu.
Damn. I think it's time for me to finally try Mint. Currently using 98% Ubuntu and 2% Windows because unfortunately there's always some sort of Windows-only software I need for one reason or another. Yes I've tried Wine, I haven't gotten it to work.
your saying snap-packages arent enough of a cluster-fuck to turn you off of Ubuntu?
Do yourself a favor, do Linux Mint Debian Edition (LMDE). It's got all the slickness of Mint, but the core is based on Debian instead of Ubuntu.
Would installing KDE plasma on LMDE be beginner-friendly.?
What Windows software do you find that isn't working on Linux?
What are they going to do about upstreams that use it? Like the Linux kernel for example.
top 50 comments