Linus's take is just the same nonsensical false equivalence I've seen a million times. He sure has fallen a long way since his glory days.

Someone should ask him if he's also planning on no longer reviewing patches to the kernel and just accepting them unconditionally, since AI is no different from a compiler after all, and nobody reviews compiler outputs.

▲

forcedtolinux 9 hours ago | parent [-]

the take is don't ban tools, and technically the compiler outputs are tested by the compiler projects + the automated testing infra

	▲	bakugo 9 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> the take is don't ban tools Yes, and that take is bad, because AI is not a tool in the traditional sense. In the software world, tools are generally expected to be deterministic. Would Linus use a compiler that is known to have a random chance to output the wrong instructions? Or an editor that has a random chance to swap something you typed for something else? > compiler outputs are tested by the compiler projects + the automated testing infra And AI outputs are tested by the AI companies and the various testing suites that are run on the kernel. If they're really the same like Linus seems to believe, there's no reason to ever read AI generated patches before merging them.