There appears to be a few bad actors in the Lemmy community spreading ragebait for personal gain

In fact, the same mechanisms added at the beginning to catch bad human written code are the exact same that catch bad AI code

  1. No, the Linux kernel won’t use AI to auto approve code for inclusion. And no plans to do so
  2. The Kernel actually has a huge number of maintainers. As part of the process, all patches are reviewed by a human who provide feedback as part of the process, and patches get bounced back and forth multiple time.
  3. Patches don’t just magically go straight to master. The maintainers generally have their own branches where it goes to, then it goes to staging trees like Linux-Next. It goes through many eyes, and many tests by the end. The idea that AI code is overrunning the kernel is rediculous
  4. Maintainers also check that the code meets coding guidelines and is written properly, and solves the problem they are trying to solve. Yes, they also ensure the code isn’t slop
  5. LLM’s though might be used to identify obvious problems (bugs / coding guideline issues) with the code. These don’t generate “slop” just find issues
  6. The only thing that matters is the human who submitted the code, as they should be checking the code submitted anyway (including LLM generated code).

Writing bad code isn’t something new, and isn’t unique to LLM’s. Coders (and it seems some “journalists”) have been writing slop since computers were invented.

The process hasn’t gotten less stringent (probably even MORE stringent as there is an additional set of robotic eyes that can also check), and the same mechanisms that were put in place to catch badly written code 10 years ago, are still there now

  • JTode@lemmy.worldEnglish
    135·
    7 days ago

    If you were around when Debian adopted Systemd, you will recognize this mass hysteria among those who do not code or maintain.

  • Toga77@lemmy.worldEnglish
    114·
    7 days ago

    I like how we keep trusting humans to not take shortcuts.

    You know humans, the most legendarily lazy, shortcut taking, lying ass fuckin species.

    Come on.

    The kernel isn’t slop yet. I’ll let real life experience tell me what’s more likely.

    • auzy1@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      11·
      5 days ago

      I was actually thinking Pivot To AI, who seems to maintain a shitty blog, patreon (of course) and even a Lemmy community (where you seemingly get banned without debate if you disagree with them… And then abused after you can banned). Rather than doing any actual programming it looks like, they just write articles attacking programmers.

      That’s actually why I wrote this, as I felt there was no right of reply, and I suspect he was knowingly providing deceptive information for personal gain, financial gain and attention. At the very least, banning someone, and then abusing them after they can’t comment/respond is so childish lol

      The implication he seemed to be making too (or that his readers seemed to gather it seems), was that the recent changes would mean that kernel code potentially goes straight through AI to the kernel… And that is a blatant lie that has deviated so far from the truth. There was seemingly no attempt in that article (the parts I read) on educating how the process works

      There are so many completely valid arguments that could be made against AI, so, it’s completely unnecessary for him to deceive, spread misinformation and bullshit people. Either that, or he needs to actually learn what the fuck he’s talking about

  • begrudgedcarfolk@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    815·
    7 days ago

    No, the kernel has not gone “Full AI Slop Code” yet. FTFY

    Though I’d argue it has since Linus introduced a racing condition with his latest slop contribution.

    • auzy1@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      166·
      7 days ago

      It’s not called a Racing condition, its called a race condition (so, I already know you’re probably not a dev anyway, and are just repeating info)

      The kernel has always had race conditions… A good example is: https://www.networkworld.com/article/4200802/linux-xfs-has-a-decade-old-race-condition-allowing-full-root-access.html (this was decades old code)

      In fact, race conditions were a big factor for dropping SysVInit… They’re even easier to do on a multi-threaded system, and become more common when optimising and multiple things are happening at once

      And, the simple fact is, the development process is DESIGNED to catch them (and it did), but they are so common, that the news never reports them. If anything, AI is actually making them LESS common

    • NoLemurs@lemmy.worldEnglish
      338·
      7 days ago

      So… your evidence for slop is that he made a patch, they caught an issue in the review process, and then he had to go on vacation so he asked another maintainer to take over to get the change done correctly in the merge window?

      How is that not the process working exactly as intended?

      • HappyFrog@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        61·
        6 days ago

        Nonono, you must understand, every patch Linus made before using AI was flawless and required no review at all.

    • auzy1@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      147·
      7 days ago

      From my understanding, that was a patch series that was still under development, and NOT in the kernel. And, it was caught in Code reviews.

      Code reviews are normal, and stuff like this is NORMAL, and has been well before AI. Are you seriously claiming the kernel never received buggy patch sets (in staging / non-master trees) in the past?

      Also, it is interesting that the same 3 links seem to be posted everywhere blindly. Did you even read what I wrote in my post?

      Do you mind explaining the technical reasons why the patch is “slop”? Or, did you just see the LLM part and think “this is gonna be great pitchfork material and I’ll pretend like I actually understand whats going on”

    • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      71·
      7 days ago

      Your accusation is the definition of slop. Sounds convincing, asserts to have sources, turns out there’s nothing of substance.

    • corsicanguppy@lemmy.caEnglish
      115·
      7 days ago

      LLMs have no business near the kernel code or being used at all.

      Cool. Let us know when your fork is packaged and I’ll test it out.