At the Linux Foundation’s Open Source Summit, the Linux creator argued that AI-written code claims are misleading — and warned that a wave of low-quality, AI-generated bug reports is quietly burning out the maintainers who keep open source running.
[…]
Speaking on stage, Torvalds said the framing misses an obvious historical parallel. Compilers have translated essentially all shipped source code into machine code for decades, he noted, yet no engineer describes their software as “compiler-written.” AI, in his view, belongs in the same category — a powerful productivity layer sitting on top of human design and understanding, not a replacement for it.
I think the notion that AI tools are actually intelligent and AI does the important work while the programmer only does tidy up work is manipulative framing.
The same as with many kinds of automation which denies the human part of the work, for better exploitation. It reminds me in self-service cash registers which are said to be fully automated - but the customer does now the work of the cashier and is given the responsibility of the employee.
Nobody would say a book itself is smart, in spite of printed books being a powerful technology, and some books containing deep thoughts. Nobody would say a photographic camera does the actual work of a painter. It is a tool which can help to create art in the hands of an artist