- cross-posted to:
- upliftingnews@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- upliftingnews@lemmy.world
Good.
If you didn’t write the code, then you didn’t think through every detail.
If you didn’t think through every detail, then you have gaps in your understanding.
If you have gaps in your understanding, then why are you submitting code and pushing the burden onto someone else to understand it for you?
What makes you think they’d want to accept that burden?
Linus:

Linus’s position seems to be to embrace whatever eases the burden on maintainers. Using an LLM to review patches does that, which is why he was receptive to the Sashiko bot. But he won’t be happy with AI slop patches, for obvious reasons.
Using an LLM to review patches does that, which is why he was receptive to the Sashiko bot.
Funnily enough, I was just reading a post from a dev complaining about the review bot and how it makes developing patches harder.
Previously review comments were from somebody who had experience with the code or subsystem in question, who understood how the whole thing worked. The LLM bot has none of that and will spit out nonsensical comments that the developer now needs to try to understand and verify, so they still have to ping other developers to see if the LLM output makes sense.
This is in line with how a lot of large open source projects are dealing with it
- don’t force people to use an AI tool
- don’t be a jerk to people who choose to use a tool with AI
- you are responsible for how you interact with the project. If it wouldn’t be ok if done by a human, its not ok if done by a bot
Except that you should be a jerk to people who choose to use AI.
Linus:

Tool for making development faster: exists
People who hate that tool and all FOSS that it’s involved in: Hmm I wonder why people aren’t making more software for free
Tool that actively destroys the world in many ways: destroys the world
People who don’t know how to use their brain: Hmm I wonder why people are hating on this tool, must be because they are just haters