517
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] davel@lemmy.ml 157 points 1 day ago

When the topic is AI, the quality of some of these Lemmy threads drops down to the level of YouTube comments.

[-] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 91 points 1 day ago

I got banned from the Fuck AI community for saying Linus isn’t stupid. Not that he’s right on AI, just that he’s not stupid.

Indeed, the atmosphere is toxic.

We’re on a site where people happily discuss their arr stack or transpiring the PS5 system, but bemoan AI is killing artists and coding.

There are real ethical issues, job impacts, environmental issues, property rights issues (real and intellectual), privacy, a stack of cards economy etc.

But there is also utility, and frankly the genie is out of the bottle. For better or worse.

Catching kernel bugs in Linux with AI should be seen as a good because they’re not being exploited offensively by private actors. AI review that catches the most annoying 80% of errors or issues saves human time, while not contributing slop to the kernel.

There is a lot to discuss if you show up in good faith.

Also, Linus is an asshole. Why would anyone be surprised he reacted like an asshole? His point on his expectations is actually clear and sensible to me. He probably could have said just that, but he’s an asshole, and acting how you would expect after a bunch of people are yelling at him.

[-] Someonelol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 32 points 1 day ago

Nuance is a hard concept to get in most Lemmy comment threads. It's obvious it's just a tool that uses an insane amount of resources that can do some good in certain applications. The problem stems from it being abused for evil and stupid things.

Can AI be used to help flag cancerous growths in x rays and help save lives? Absolutely! Can it also be used to track every human being on the planet for surveillance purposes while its proponents build massive biome-destroying data centers to act as the infrastructure? It sure can!

All that said, I still don't feel confident about rolling in AI code to open source projects when bots aren't accountable to their contributions. They should require a huge amount of oversight which I doubt is happening at the moment.

[-] Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 hours ago

This comment disguising itself as nuanced by saying the word nuanced a bunch is really nuanced.

[-] f3nyx@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 day ago

I want to expand on your first thought and just say that in my experience the internet as a whole is not a great place for nuanced takes, and I've noticed that becoming mirrored in reality over the last decade. Perhaps its been happening for longer.

There's so much going on, and so many actors trying to influence the masses. I don't blame anyone for having different conclusions to my own, there's an almost untrackable amount of sources to draw information (and disinformation) from. I just hope we can get to a point together where we can (again?) discuss nuance without ceding to emotion.

[-] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

Agreed.

On AI contributed code I’m always confused, if I put MY name on it and push it I am stating it meets my standards. If I allow a Claude contributed commit into my code, I am stating Claude passed my standards.

If someone is contributing and it’s not up to standards, why is it getting merged? If it’s a maintainer and they’re merging crap with review or standards then you couldn’t have actually trusted them pre-LLMs.

Ever since the first iteration of GitHub Copilot it was always your responsibility to make sure contributions to your project were correct. The beauty of open source is that when a project jumps off a cliff you can fork it or make your own.

Partially what is good about Linus is historically Linux has said no to crap, and the Linux team expend considerable effort to remove crap they realized was crap too late.

[-] sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 1 day ago

From my layperson understanding, the true program is not the lines of code, it's the model that lives in the programmer's brain. The code is just an extension of that.

If it needs debugging, it is the mental model that helps. If you need to add a feature, same thing. If a few years go by and no one remembers how the code works, rebuilding that mental model is the first step in making progress.

I suspect that it used to be that if someone contributed good code to the kernel project, it meant that they had a sufficient mental model. But with AI, it can seem like they do.

Maybe if you're Linus your understanding of the kernel is so strong it would take years to atrophy, if at all. I don't know. But developers in general?

Too many times in my work life, people have told me one thing, but it turns out that AI invented that and they didn't really know what they were talking about. On things that I'm an expert in, I can catch it. But if I'm not an expert, I don't realize the mistake until a consequence occurs.

Allowing AI is basically making it so the maintainers have to be complete experts in everything they accept. Maybe that was already the case, but that is my layperson understanding of it.

[-] Prime@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 22 hours ago

This is correct. And yes, we expect everyone that contributes to have this understanding. If you don't have it, welcome to ask. Misunderstandings that happen despite your effort will be caught by the steward.

[-] Dreamcatcher@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Just don't engage with any community that starts with "fuck" if you have any kind of nuance for the subject matter.

It's not a great time. If you don't get banned, you'll get dogpiled with angry and idiotic comments anyway, by people who have decided their own facts already.

[-] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago

All the fuckX communities are toxic for the same reason.

No nuance. No complexity. Binary.

The world is not black & white it's shades of grey.

[-] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I got banned from saying not all that is called ai is bad by giving video game npcs from the last decades as an example.

I thought it was just llms that they where against but nope. I imagine Alan Turing spinning in his grave.

[-] alottafagina@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 day ago

Vague criticisms, fallacious reasoning, highly emotive language, little response to attempts at discussion (though some might engage in disingenuous discussions of shifting goalposts here and there to discourage particularly vocal engagees from future participation). So I'd say that Linus is just the latest convenient scapegoat in an Anti-AI 'trend' that will have little impact on the rate of AI adoption in the long run.

Sucks that I waited until now to try to form a measured opinion on AI because now all the discussions on the internet are hot garbage.

[-] drthunder@midwest.social 3 points 1 day ago

Discussions on the internet are hot garbage in part because thanks to LLMs you can't know what's real anymore. Of course there were bots before, but any random idiot can pay OpenAI for a subscription now and spam anywhere they want.

[-] alottafagina@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 hours ago

Thanks for your contribution to the pile.

[-] davel@lemmy.ml -2 points 1 day ago
[-] Kajika@lemmy.ml 1 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

There's nothing Marxist in that article. Only fallacies from rich white man ranting about people pushing back against fascism.

People say AI to mean LLM first because main stream western, fascist, media pushed the term by inviting exclusively non-expert and CEOs to talk about the subject. People are pushing back against a product that is mean to make workers dull and replace them by ~~stealing their works even by capitalist standards~~ -> exploiting their works, appropriating it to themselves without any compensation nor permission.

The article tried to paint the discussion as anti-llm would be anti technology, which is not Marxist in any way and not relevant. Weirdly enough fascist guy like the one on this article don't talk about cryptocurrency as something we should chill for. Isn't it a tool too?

Current LLM chill is the opposite of dialectical materialism: what is the concrete analysis here? LLM outputed nothing of value for years despite the hundred of billions invested. Worst it actually participate to global warming, bourgeoisie attempt to mass control, getting rid of workers and inflating computer costs. So the real consequences for people are losses only.

And for what? To get to have unskilled rich white people who can afford the awfully hight price of LLM to boats about "I made this" while it is actually made from steal and empoverish people and enriching tech lord's.

So no, thanks, and trying to paint fallacies to Marxism isn't going to help either.

EDIT: replace the "stealing" argument as pointed out -> https://lemmy.ml/post/54102413/28384201 , this can be confusing with the anti-piracy propaganda vocabulary.

[-] m532@lemmy.ml 4 points 18 hours ago

stealing

Stealing: when you don't have it anymore afterwards.

Copying: when both have it afterwards

The RIAA's propaganda campaign was sadly very successful.

[-] Kajika@lemmy.ml 3 points 17 hours ago

You're right, I said "steal" as it was the most common word, the right one was "exploiting". Fixing it.

[-] Kajika@lemmy.ml 2 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

Actually let me analyze again your comment here: I thought you were right at first but thinking about it not really.

First let me address : I didn't know about RIAA, this kind of paternalistic way of addressing people is not good in any way. We aren't all USA-centric (like you?).

Then about the "steal" argument:

  • it is a vocabulary used for century by Marxist organizations about the value taken by the bourgeoisie from the proletariat work.
  • the argument of "copying is OK" is missing the point : any FOSS dev/organization I know would gladly give their work to you, individual. But not to big tech to commercialize it and make extreme amount of money, as well as steering conversation towards fascism in the process. While also having an amazingly big impact on the environment.
  • "both have it afterwards" is also a fallacy : any work done on computer can be seen like this : if your an accountant and you boss copy your accounting sheets and do not pay you, it is not stealing? You both have the file, for you it won't make you any money, he will. Big tech taking FOSS code for their profit is not piracy as of individual accessing cultural product they cannot afford in the first place. And if you make profit from piracy this is a whole other discussion I would gladly here your thoughts about it.
[-] m532@lemmy.ml 2 points 13 hours ago

Private property is theft. "Intellectual property" is a form of private property. It exclusively benefits the bourgeois.

Regarding your third bullet point: Try your example again, but this time the boss doesn't copy the file. It's still labor theft. The copying is irrelevant.

[-] Kajika@lemmy.ml 0 points 12 hours ago

Are you saying I am right then? I feel you think of something but it is not clearly getting to me here.

  • it's labor theft -> hence the term steal I was using
  • copying is irrelevant -> so I was right? the labor theft of big tech in order to sell LLM is wrong on many level and we should fight against it.

Do you at least see that, to me, what you just said is validating my points?

Also if anyone else (not to you @m532): "AI" (in reality chatbot or generative AI) should be made by the people for the people, and FOSS ideology (can we say Librism in English?) have always, and still mostly is, against the closed-source (close dataset to be precise here) nature of current big-tech AI. This was already a problem 8 years ago when the space started to get filled with "scientific" paper that didn't disclose code/data (sometime just code but still insufficient) hence couldn't be reproduce while sometimes having wild claims. We shouldn't give so much credit, attention, money to those fascists in charge of selling as much LLM as possible, whatever human, economic and environment costs.

[-] m532@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 hours ago

Let me try that again:

if your an accountant and you boss ~~copy your accounting sheets and~~ do not pay you, it is not stealing? You ~~both~~ have the file, for you it won’t make you any money,

The copying part is gone, yet the problem stays the same, so the copying was never the problem.

[-] Kajika@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

you talked about labor theft, why do you think the boss should pay you? An I am not saying "should" as society should be like that, I agree with no private property and no money -> should as right now is it OK or not to make money from other people works : this is exploitation.

I argue that the "steal" of today's LLM is the same exploitation of worker as usually described, here outside the social contract of librism and free software.

[-] davel@lemmy.ml 0 points 22 hours ago

Bad news, @yogthos@lemmy.ml, you’re not a Marxist, and your analysis is the opposite of dialectical materialism.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 2 points 22 hours ago

I'll never recover from this. 🤣

[-] Kajika@lemmy.ml 1 points 22 hours ago

was that supposed to be an argument against my explanation?

[-] davel@lemmy.ml 2 points 22 hours ago

Obviously it wasn’t, or I would have made an argument.

[-] Kajika@lemmy.ml 2 points 22 hours ago

Yes please do not make any argument and post memes with some interesting comments

When the topic is AI, the quality of some of these Lemmy threads drops down to the level of YouTube c omments.

Really helps.

[-] Malica@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

We have our share of radicals

this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2026
517 points (96.2% liked)

Linux

68118 readers
1312 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS