this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2026
187 points (89.5% liked)

Technology

87279 readers
3135 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. 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.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Lettuceeatlettuce@lemmy.ml 3 points 57 minutes ago

If there's anybody I trust to use LLMs in a responsible way, (to whatever degree that's even possible) it would be Linus Torvalds. He has some of the highest standards for software development in the world, and the same can be said for the core Linux kernel development team in general.

The general problem though, is that the people who are the least qualified to do software development are very often the people who are the most likely to use LLMs to try to slop their way to the top.

I think that the combination of cost increases for inference, inherent limitations in model integrity, and the economic destruction that will ensue when these fraudster CEOs have finally squeezed every last drop of blood from every last stone they can find, will leave "AI" in a similar place as blockchain/crypto/NFTs.

There will be a relatively niche market for software engineers and related tech workers; local LLM boxes, some subscription-based models that companies pay for with their licensing packages, hobbyists, and some minimal integrations into software suites for tools like background removal, lighting enhancement, etc.

There will be no Singularity, no AGI, no all-knowing Machine God.

[–] jaykrown@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

Using AI with Rust compiler is a combination that's worked well for me many times already. You can check out https://slingshotspeeders.com/ if you want to experience compiled Rust in the browser using Bevy 0.19 for an orbital mechanics simulation racing game for free with no account easily.

[–] Dogiedog64@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

Brain damage.

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 5 points 5 hours ago

fuckin gross.

[–] artwork@lemmy.world 16 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

@inari@piefed.zip , may I ask why do you change the title so awfully it does not only not state the same as the article but misleads it?

[–] helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world 7 points 4 hours ago

So it looks like the source originally used that awful title misrepresenting the article it self. In other words the source needs to be blacklisted for spreading bullshit. Dose this community have a blacklist yet?

I know blacklisting sources is a steep slope to censorship, but at a certain point if the source feels they need to click bait people with tabloid headlines they are not worth our time.

[–] boonhet@lemmy.zip 9 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

The URL they posted has the same title as the post here so it's the source that changed their title after the fact.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 56 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

I wish more would listen.

Many seem to interpret the headline as “Torvalds is an AI Bro now,” when its more like him yelling “If you all don’t treat these things as tools, shit is going to hit the fan.”

[–] halezinflames@lemmus.org 18 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

After seeing what happened to windows because of this "tool" I think many of us are rightfully skeptical of what will happen to this community.

It happened before, why are we okay with it happening again?

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 19 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (15 children)

Microsoft doesn’t treat it as a tool; that’s the problem.

…Which isn’t surprising. Not only because Microsoft is Microsoft, but they own like a third of OpenAI, so they have a vested interest in perpetuating the AI hype.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 7 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

But you still have to compile

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 7 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

So funny thing, a colleague of mine was arguing that there's no reason to do a compiler because he got Claude to generate ELF binary directly for a hello world...

Some of the AI bros are very extremely bullish on it too the point of saying compilers are a waste of time..

[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

I meaaan i guess. I don’t think the training set is good enough for anything complex eyes

[–] expr@programming.dev 23 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)

Did the headline change? The current headline is Torvalds: "100% of Their Code is Written by Compilers" Too

The title of this post makes for a dumb headline, at any rate. Linus, in response to claims in the industry that projects are now "99% written by AI", drew an analogy to compilers by saying that all machine code for projects are written by compilers, yet no one says their project was 100% written by a compiler. It's just talking about stupid hype, which is valid.

That being said, it's still quite unfortunate that Linus has fallen into the trap of LLMs.

[–] heh@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

I don’t get the impression he’s fallen in the trap at all.

More so, he sees it for what it is. It’s a tool that can help, but needs smart people that can validate its output. It can’t design entire systems nor effectively solve real world business problems on its own. It’s not going anywhere, so may as well adapt to our new reality.

[–] jasoman@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago

Source did change the title if you look at the URL matches what OP posted

[–] piyuv@lemmy.world 161 points 19 hours ago (19 children)

Never seen a non-deterministic compiler though

[–] chunes@lemmy.world 7 points 6 hours ago

Or one that pretends compilation was a success when it wasn't.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 11 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

Technically, LLMs (and most ML models) are deterministic with the same input and same seed.

I get what you mean though.

[–] Scrollone@feddit.it 4 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (2 children)

So does ChatGPT intentionally change seed at every interaction so it always spits two different outputs given the same input?

[–] Scipitie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 6 hours ago

In short: yes. You can tune these values when self hosting - it basically changes the b chance which tokens will be used under which circumstances.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

Like Scipitie said, sort of.

In the ChatGPT app, there's tons of shuffling in the background, like context being injected, maybe sampling changed, agenic action, quantization... its "far" from the actual LLM, opaque by design, and as a result certainly not deterministic.

You can sometimes get deterministic output with the OpenAI API, but it's also dependent on nothing changing on their end. And their end changes a lot.

But self hosting or using a more consistent provider will give you deterministic output.

load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›