You say most people believe this, but I see many people every day for weeks now claiming Linux is vibecoded now. Why? Three stories: 1) months ago LLM use was not outright banned in kernel development 2) Linus admitted to using LLMs in an experimental branch to find and patch bugs 3) a recent shift in attitude happened, toward LLM-driven PRs because there were too many, and the reaction from Linus and the other maintainers was to raise the bar for submitting PRs to reduce the chance of slop wasting people’s time.
All of this was a series of level headed responses and course corrections which at no time was indicative of anything more than LLMs are useful sometimes. Yet people all over Lemmy are saying shit like “Linux is all in on vibecoding”. Besides that issue, I’ve seen and been involved in many conversations where idiots will say that any use of AI is super unethical and unacceptable. The binary thinking on this issue is strong on here.
Ah well I agree I would Linux love maintainers to take a more principled stance against LLM contributions given all the negative externalities of the technology as it exists today.
there’s a strong case to be made that there is no way to use the current “frontier” models ethically because of how they were trained and who their patrons are. I would love to see that acknowledged.
You thought you were being subtle but if your response to an extremist viewpoint is “yes they make a good point” you’re not getting it but you do seem to want to definitely take a side.
“I’m just being objective but your point isn’t worth addressing while the thought process you take issue with is totally valid”
I’m not trying to be subtle, I’m trying to be open. Clearly we’ve each got our opinions and I think I’ve been very upfront with mine. You’re right I don’t think being against this technology qualifies as an “extremist” position anymore then being against cloud computing or Nvidia are extreme takes.
Anyway you didn’t even try me. I’m elsewhere in this thread talking about the legitimate uses for LLMs. Not everything is as black vs white, clanker vs luddite, as you’re making it.
Yes being so against a technology that you will spread lies about it makes one an extremist. Siding with that… Whatever. Have fun with that. I won’t be seeing anymore of this from you.
You say most people believe this, but I see many people every day for weeks now claiming Linux is vibecoded now. Why? Three stories: 1) months ago LLM use was not outright banned in kernel development 2) Linus admitted to using LLMs in an experimental branch to find and patch bugs 3) a recent shift in attitude happened, toward LLM-driven PRs because there were too many, and the reaction from Linus and the other maintainers was to raise the bar for submitting PRs to reduce the chance of slop wasting people’s time.
All of this was a series of level headed responses and course corrections which at no time was indicative of anything more than LLMs are useful sometimes. Yet people all over Lemmy are saying shit like “Linux is all in on vibecoding”. Besides that issue, I’ve seen and been involved in many conversations where idiots will say that any use of AI is super unethical and unacceptable. The binary thinking on this issue is strong on here.
Ah well I agree I would Linux love maintainers to take a more principled stance against LLM contributions given all the negative externalities of the technology as it exists today.
there’s a strong case to be made that there is no way to use the current “frontier” models ethically because of how they were trained and who their patrons are. I would love to see that acknowledged.
So you are on the side of binary thinking, in the end. Cool.
What makes you think that? I am on no side. I’m just trying to be objective. Everything I said is factually borne out afaik.
Also
Lol now you’re just playing with me, very funny ;p
You thought you were being subtle but if your response to an extremist viewpoint is “yes they make a good point” you’re not getting it but you do seem to want to definitely take a side.
“I’m just being objective but your point isn’t worth addressing while the thought process you take issue with is totally valid”
I’m not trying to be subtle, I’m trying to be open. Clearly we’ve each got our opinions and I think I’ve been very upfront with mine. You’re right I don’t think being against this technology qualifies as an “extremist” position anymore then being against cloud computing or Nvidia are extreme takes.
Anyway you didn’t even try me. I’m elsewhere in this thread talking about the legitimate uses for LLMs. Not everything is as black vs white, clanker vs luddite, as you’re making it.
Yes being so against a technology that you will spread lies about it makes one an extremist. Siding with that… Whatever. Have fun with that. I won’t be seeing anymore of this from you.
Lies, like… ?