That seemingly didn't stop the pro- and against-AI camps in the kernel from continuing to bicker, though.
  • keisatsu@infosec.pubEnglish
    40·
    11 hours ago

    if Linus, who has worked with the language AND the project for decades, can’t find a race condition and a performance regression in his VERY FIRST LLM-assisted commit, then just maybe we should accept that humans are fucking horrible att catching the mistakes that clankers make and stop deluding us into thinking that this is the future of software engineering.

    • Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      4·
      4 hours ago

      What makes you think he wouldn’t have made the same mistake hand coding it?

      If he didn’t catch it on his own review the likelihood that he would’ve made the same mistake if he coded it himself is high.

      • keisatsu@infosec.pubEnglish
        3·
        3 hours ago

        First of all, if a human makes a mistake it’s a learning opportunity. When a human misses a bug an LLM hallucinated, noone really learn from it.

        I like to compare it with the xray machines at airports. Human operators stare at the screens hunting for weapons and other prohibited items and miss pretty obvious stuff because they get bored out of their minds. They actually added a mechanism to insert fake xray images of weapons ever so often to actually keep the operators interested and alert. Ain’t much too different from doing code reviews being the human-in-the-loop/scapegoat.

        Also, LLMs don’t necessarily generate good code. They excel at generating good-looking mediocre code.

        So yeah, I’m gonna go ahead and claim that Linus is more likely to miss a bug a LLM wrote on his behalf than one he wrote himself.

    • monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.worldEnglish
      10·
      11 hours ago

      Ok. Looks like the process just needs to do more testing/validation in CI.

      What’s your alternative? just stop progress here? No more new things?

      • keisatsu@infosec.pubEnglish
        44·
        11 hours ago

        How about we keep relying on deterministic tooling that are not built on stolen data and don’t fuck the economy and the environment at the same time? How about putting a fraction of the money invested i LLMs into SAST and DAST tools? Maybe a dollar or two for fuzz testers? How about we look at projects like curl and build safeguards into the project to avoid footguns?

        • monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.worldEnglish
          8·
          10 hours ago

          I’m not opposed, that honestly sounds good. Now, let’s wish in one hand and shit in the other and see which fills up first.

          People will do what they do.

          I run small local models, I do a lot of what you are saying. However this technology and process is new. Yeah capitalism will fuck everything up but you can’t control people.