Torvalds said it's better to find a controlled way of dealing with AI contributions than trying to fight it.

Apparently that's considered scandalous (by people only reading headlines).

There are other questions around AI (like what the economy of it will actually look like in the end), but "is it useful" is no longer one of those questions. Anybody who doubts that clearly hasn't actually used it.

Yes, it can also be a somewhat painful tool, both for maintainer workloads and just from a "it keeps finding embarrassing bugs" standpoint.

But the solution is not to put your head in the sand and sing "La La La, I can't hear you" at the top of your voice like some people seem to do.

The solution is to make sure those LLM tools help maintainers instead of just causing them pain. There's no question on that side.

We're not forcing anybody to use it, but I will very loudly ignore people who try to argue against other people from using it.

And no, AI isn't perfect. But Christ, anybody who points to the problems at AI had better be looking in the mirror and pointing at themselves at the same time.

Because it's not like natural intelligence is always all that great either.

Need linux pugjesus!

Dealing with Windows' bootloader is a pain in my experience. At least with Linux there's good documentation and tooling.

Get ready for the same issues appearing on Linux too!

Damn, things are heating up. This one is definitely worth a read, and it sounds like a goodbye, considering that this attitude surely isn't compatible with a longterm continued work relationship: https://lore.kernel.org/...

Though I do think that it's worth remembering that this discussion is about code analysis tools, not code generation tools. The choices don't look particular great, considering that malicious actors won't have any qualms about using AI tools to discover exploits.