It is so funny to me that the Saudis would invest into a creative industry that thrives on letting artists make what they think is right and then forbid them from doing that. And also expect that industry to then operate profitably, even though they just removed the basic foundation of that industry.
But there is no talking and arguing with people like that, so we can just get popcorn, watch and enjoy the Schadenfreude.
Tools are just tools
I don't think that's true, but we simply disagree on that.
I don't think he's hypocritical. He simply doesn't have to deal with that negative impact he "warns" about. He is in support of using it as a tool and thinks the criticism is invalid. That's a consistent perspective, even if I don't agree with it.
If he used LLMs to create bug reports, but also complained about LLM written bug reports he gets, that would be hypocritical.
Torvalds was careful to frame this as a correction of language rather than a rejection of the technology itself.
Ok...
A maintainer burden few are talking about
Alongside the productivity gains, Torvalds described a less-discussed cost: a rising flood of low-effort, AI-generated bug and vulnerability reports hitting open source projects, including the kernel’s own security channels. He said it has become common for someone to run an AI tool against a codebase, file a report flagging a “possible” issue, and then vanish when a maintainer follows up asking for more detail or a fix.
Everyone is talking about that and it is surprising to me that he doesn't recognize that as two side of the same coin. Why are you rejecting the low-effort, Ai generated bug reports, Linus, isn't AI just a productivity tool? What's wrong? Is it not being productive?
I say "surprising", it's not that surprising. It's a "guns don't kill people, people kill people" attitude. It's willfully excluding the impact that technology has on people, and framing the outcome as coming purely from people and the existence of the technology not affecting the outcome.
Also a very good point!
Sure, but they need the watermarking to later claim the copyright on the stuff that people do create in the open with their agents.
"They would never do that!"
"And even if they did, I would sue them, and then the justice system would..."
"uh... uh oh"
Well that's useful. Good thing to learn!
That's not deranged, that's Mark Zuckerberg personally announcing his goals, ideas, policy, suggestions and plans.
Read it very carefully, pay full attention and take every single word seriously.
Remember that story about the chalk mark engineer with Ford? Chalk mark 1$, knowing where to mark 1000$ ? Same with code. "Code" is easy. Knowing what to write, why and where, that's the hard part. LLMs have somehow managed to automate the code part, without the abstraction, at least in an error proof way. I don't think "coding isn't that hard" is insulting, and I don't use C++ because I think it's hard. But it's not because writing something is hard, it's because writing precisely what is needed is hard.
Anyway, this debate doesn't matter, negotiate better, be active politically to ban stuff or not, complaining on the internet won't do anyone any good. I know you're emotionally invested in this, just... breathe and do something else? Idk. Also I'm not your enemy on this, so no need to attack me.
I was not aware that the concorde flew for about 25 years? That's honestly pretty amazing.
Overall unnecessary though. Unless they demonstrate that it's somehow more efficient, by flying higher and faster and the trip being shorter? I doubt it though.
copilot should just be prompting the user for permission if it ever edits a file other than the one that is open. Im surprised that isnt already the case…?
That can't be done or they would be burying the "agentic AI" thing that has been the goal and marketing thing for the last years.
Independent actions by copilot on behalf of the user without the users knowledge is the entire point.
Read my comment again. 😜
Yeah. No they haven't.
EA is just a big bundle that they were able to buy at all with a huge pile of cash. Going around the globe, chasing studios that do this and that is a ton of work and takes forever and is not really a good strategy.
I think they're betting on exactly that recurring structure of licensed sports games.
But that still depends on letting artists do some amount of stuff. For example a bunch of sports outfits may clash with strict Islam. Same for Sims.