• Armand1@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    3 days ago

    I realize that some people really dislike AI, but this is an area where I’m willing to absolutely put my foot down as the top-level maintainer. Linux is not one of those anti-AI projects, and if somebody has issues with that, they can do the open-source thing and fork it. Or just walk away. AI is a tool, just like other tools we use. And it’s clearly a useful one.

    I think broadly speaking what he says is reasonable. If you don’t want to use AI, then don’t, but I think it can be used somewhat responsibly.

    I have all sorts of issues with AI tooling:

    • the centralization of power
    • the load it adds on maintainers because of the amount of slop bad developers (and non-devs) produce with it
    • the environmental impacts of using larger models
    • the data centers causing health risks
    • the impact on the PC industry
    • the degeneration of skills and knowledge.

    That said, it’s a tool, and can be used to amplify good work too.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yes, anyone who wants to protest any use of AI whatsoever in software development, just on pure principle, is on the fringe at this point. It is a tool and needs to be used responsibly but it’s no longer credible to say that it has no use or can’t be used responsibly.

    • Nalivai@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      and can be used to amplify good work too.

      But at this point I would argue the downsides aren’t worth it. Especially when the bubble pops, subsidies run out, and people will be forced to pay the actual price

      • Armand1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah, it is effectively subsidized by VC right now.

        I expect what will happen after the bubble bursts is that the only affordable models will be quite small ones, not the energy chugging behemoths we have now.

        They’ve already started cranking up prices in enterprise.

    • XLE@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s really weird for Linus to reference “the open source thing” while encouraging people to use legally dubious closed-source software with legally dubious output

      • Armand1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        This seems to be his view:

        In the kernel community we do open source because it results in better technology, not because of religious reasons.

        He doesn’t seem to subscribe to the idea that everything you use MUST be open source, as some more radical open source advocates do, but instead that more software SHOULD be open source.

        I would definitely prefer if AI was open source and self-hosted (or at least E2EE if cloud hosted). Sometimes though the best tool for the job as things stand is closed source.

        Aa for the legally dubious output, while AI can exactly replicate training data, it rarely does nowadays. It’s usually an amalgam of stuff.