Linus introduced a race condition and a regression with a AI generated code, then handed off fixing the problem to someone else because he was going on vacation.
Fiasco might have been an exaggeration, but it’s still pretty lame.
This was caught during review, so nothing was “introduced” quite yet. And there’s no indication that Linus wouldn’t have produced a race condition (a notoriously more easy to miss kind of bug) without the use of AI tools.
It’s only being exaggerated so much because he used AI.
That is something I am surprisingly okay with. Quickly figuring out if something is feasible is good, and doing it in a back of the napkin style is the norm, even without LLMs. Of course then you need to do it properly, without falling into the trap of reimplementing the slop.
People are welcome to stop spreading the falsehoods. In every thread where this is said (including this one), the truth is pointed out but those spreading it couldn’t care less. Just scroll. Others are pointing out the details here just like every other place.
Linus introduced a race condition and a regression with a AI generated code, then handed off fixing the problem to someone else because he was going on vacation.
Fiasco might have been an exaggeration, but it’s still pretty lame.
https://lkml.iu.edu/2610.1/13698.html
Race conditions are not unusual, and it was caught during review, so there’s really no problem here.
This was caught during review, so nothing was “introduced” quite yet. And there’s no indication that Linus wouldn’t have produced a race condition (a notoriously more easy to miss kind of bug) without the use of AI tools.
It’s only being exaggerated so much because he used AI.
I could attribute the race condition just as much to their use of the C language as to AI.
Race conditions I’m pretty sure aren’t language specific. Rust can have them too.
Yes, but the tools provided by Rust:
unsafe {}block to be used.Yea he basically said “This seems to work but is slop, lead Dev, make it real.”
That is something I am surprisingly okay with. Quickly figuring out if something is feasible is good, and doing it in a back of the napkin style is the norm, even without LLMs. Of course then you need to do it properly, without falling into the trap of reimplementing the slop.
:/
This is why dictionaries list more than 1 definition and you shouldn’t stop at the first one:
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/lame
People who write this dictionary should listen to the public more maybe. Lame doesn’t mean what you wrote for at least 25 years.
Great
This doesn’t make me nervous at all…
It shouldn’t, because it’s a lie.
Not what happened. I’m not digging it up but this story has been debunked repeatedly
(you’re welcome to just point folks to a debunking)
People are welcome to stop spreading the falsehoods. In every thread where this is said (including this one), the truth is pointed out but those spreading it couldn’t care less. Just scroll. Others are pointing out the details here just like every other place.
Literally you got hit with an linux mailing list saying this is what happened?
Those words don’t make sense