@bekkaboo@girlcock.club Linux itself is heavily using AI models. Therefore, every Linux distribution moving to recent kernel versions is heavily built on top of using AI models. Creating a Linux distribution not heavily using it would require a hard fork of the Linux kernel and many other projects.
It's unclear what would be accomplished by banning AI for a tiny portion of the code while continuing to use Linux, AOSP, Chromium and hundreds of other projects heavily using it. We'd still be benefiting from it.
GrapheneOS is currently defending its use of AI coding tools on Mastodon against complaints by various accounts claiming to be users.
We do not understand where you’re coming from or why you’re so incredibly angry with us. It’s not justified and does not make sense.
I’m trying to highlight the absurdity of tieing buggyness to sloppyness, they are two distinct axis, not a spectrum. There are plenty of problems with LLMs but bugginess is not one of them. Idk if you’ve been watching the news lately, bug squashing in old code is up big time, can you guess why? And I wonder have you ever worked on a real codebase? Because the only perfect code is the code you wrote 5minites ago… go look at Linux kernel code… arguably the most used but of software out there, find me anything perfect in there… like what is going on here in this artisanal, hand rolled, organic code?! You’re arguing devs need more time to work on security, well guess what’s giving them more time to work on security…
Ps. Sorry to the Bluetooth dev, didn’t mean for you to catch strays, I love your code anyway!
There are plenty of problems with LLMs but bugginess is not one of them
LOOOOOOLOLOL
Idk if you’ve been watching the news lately, bug squashing in old code is up big time, can you guess why?
Lying megacorporations, most likely. What is the source of this information?
go look at Linux kernel code… arguably the most used but of software out there, find me anything perfect in there
Please refer to my previous comment. You are once again pushing this ridiculous strawman that human written code is perfect, when no one ever said such a thing.
You’re arguing devs need more time to work on security
I’ll grant that bosses and managers have a valid role for keeping the work on track. But someone who tries that without being qualified themself will cause major problems.
No, you need to make sure vulnerabilities aren’t introduced by lazy or underpaid developers.
Its so annoying that all code has been perfect and bug free until these silly LLM people came and made buggy code
“Perfect and bug-free” <---------------> “Chock full of slop and security holes”
This is a spectrum, but you already knew that and are just trolling.
I’m trying to highlight the absurdity of tieing buggyness to sloppyness, they are two distinct axis, not a spectrum. There are plenty of problems with LLMs but bugginess is not one of them. Idk if you’ve been watching the news lately, bug squashing in old code is up big time, can you guess why? And I wonder have you ever worked on a real codebase? Because the only perfect code is the code you wrote 5minites ago… go look at Linux kernel code… arguably the most used but of software out there, find me anything perfect in there… like what is going on here in this artisanal, hand rolled, organic code?! You’re arguing devs need more time to work on security, well guess what’s giving them more time to work on security…
Ps. Sorry to the Bluetooth dev, didn’t mean for you to catch strays, I love your code anyway!
LOOOOOOLOLOL
Lying megacorporations, most likely. What is the source of this information?
Please refer to my previous comment. You are once again pushing this ridiculous strawman that human written code is perfect, when no one ever said such a thing.
Nope, you made that up, too.
I’ll grant that bosses and managers have a valid role for keeping the work on track. But someone who tries that without being qualified themself will cause major problems.