416
Linus Torvalds used AI to fix a Linux bug, and now LLM critics on Linux face an uncomfortable choice
(www.xda-developers.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2026
416 points (90.2% liked)
Technology
87773 readers
4180 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
It’s interesting to see AI being used for something as practical as debugging a Linux issue. I think the bigger question is how much developers can rely on AI without losing their understanding of the underlying code. AI can clearly speed things up, but human review still seems essential.
I think its pretty clear that an OG hacker like linus using AI as a helpful assistant is very different from a junior dev using it as a crutch
The question now is how to develop proper software engineers who have the old school skills first and foremmost, and then are able to use the assistance of an AI
Exactly. AI should complement strong fundamentals, not replace them. Developers still need to learn how to think, debug, understand systems, and make technical decisions independently. Once those foundations are solid, AI becomes a powerful multiplier rather than a crutch.
It's especially essential to mark the code as AI generated. AI makes mistakes just as humans do. Problem is AI makes different kinds of mistakes than humans.
A human will tend to forget to do something they were supposed to do. An AI will do a bunch of unnecessary shit.
Also you can tell that a human didn't put a lot of thought into some code (no comments, sloppy variable names) so you're more likely to say "yeah ok, I used to make that kind of mistake when I was younger" and just fix it. AI generated code will have all kinds of comments which normally makes you more hesitant before making a change. It looks like someone really thought through what they were doing, but in reality it's something generated by an LLM and no real thought was given to the code.
Why is your code so messy that it needs comments everywhere? Comments should pretty much be reserved for special cases anyway
"Speed up" implies the outputs are the same, so I disagree with that.
That’s a fair point. I meant “speed up” in terms of development efficiency, rather than implying the outputs are necessarily identical. Thanks for pointing that out.
Nope, clearly you didn't get my point and we disagree about this.
I think, practically, yeah. That’s exactly the point I’m making AI is changing how we approach these problems, not simply replacing the human part.