From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
The bug reports may not be arriving yet. They will. And when they do, you will face the same calculation the kernel maintainers faced: maintain dead code to satisfy automated reporters, or cut it.
This could actually be a good thing for software quality.
no paywall here:
YSK archive.is uses you to maliciously DDOS a random blogger they don't like and other weird stuff.
https://cybernews.com/security/archive-today-launches-ddos-directing-visitors-to-attack-blog/
In a world where psychopathic mega corporations are openly looking for ways to enslave humanity and bring about the end of the planet, the weird tantrums of an obviously mentally spicy web site owner just seem cute.
over doxxing? callling doxxing them as "something they dont like" makes it seem so arbitrary
I don't care about who did what, it's all he said/she said and either way I didn't consent to being part of such an attack.
At this point, it feels like there's very little left that isn't malicious.
Other sites could also do this. That's a design fault in the internet.
I doubt the Linux kernel allowing slop patch submissions with potentially higher rate of hidden insidious bugs will help the LLM-pocalypse much...
That's not kernel policy but LF guidance. From the kernel's point of view patches still have a high bar to pass to get merged and I don't think we have enough data yet to see if LLM based submissions to the kernel have a higher or lower error rate than humans.
I certainly feel the uptick in LLM reports though - one of the projects I'm working on is seeing a deluge of them at the moment.
The kernel policy seems to be what I think it is, since LLM slop patches have been merged.
I find it slightly contradictory to delete code due to hidden bugs on the one end, then insert LLM code at the other rather than hand-craft the code to avoid hidden bugs better.
You should look up the genetic fallacy. And using phrases like "hand-craft code" make you look stupid.
How is that patch sloppy?
I feel the term slop is being overused to cover anything an LLM has touched. If I ask an agent to re-read a mail thread for me and apply the changes to my tree to review is that slop? Would you feel better about it if I copy and paste from email to code in my editor?
I've just been doing a bunch of bug triage which was mostly driven by the agent although I checked the issues where it had commented. Was that slop? Ironically a lot of the issues where AI generated although for the most part more complete than a lot of the purely human submissions we get. Are those bug reports slop? What about the poorly drafted human ones?
Are you saying that AI slop is bad in those (counts) 4 removed lines of code?
I'm saying if their policy is to accept AI code, which the link seems to demonstrate that it is, the rate of future hidden errors in the kernel code is likely going to go up. This is what all the studies are saying, including those involving competent coders.
Your making a big assumption extrapolating from one particular study involving Java code and a static analyser.
Hm... How well does FreeBSD run games? It still uses WINE and Proton, right?
I heard it's alright for games and many apparently work. Sadly, FreeBSD simply doesn't seem to have drivers for a lot of hardware that I'm using. And as far as I know, they don't have an LLM policy yet (so they could still come out in favor of it).