AI discussions

Martin · 2026-09-22 22:01:17

Another good IEEE Spectrum read:

https://spectrum.ieee.org/ai-engineer-skills

/Martin

johnraff · Yesterday 02:28:35

^excellent, thanks.

The instinct today is to let AI do the entry-level work because it is faster and cheaper. But some of that work is not overhead to be eliminated. It is the training apparatus of your future senior staff, and you should protect it the way you’d protect any other piece of critical infrastructure.

johnraff · Yesterday 02:48:43

greenjeans wrote:

It cuts both ways, useful at times, and flat out wrong at times, this is why I shudder when I think of heavy AI usage in the kernel, 30 million+ lines of code it just doesn't seem possible that someone is actually auditing the gargantuan amount of patches AI is generating for it.

Well, all those 30 million lines were originally written - and audited - by human beings. Nobody checked over the whole lot at once.

It seems that the quality of AI generated bug reports might have improved over the last year or so, but anyway the bottomline is that each patch has to be signed off by a human developer. They take personal responsibility so there is some motivation to do that auditing seriously.

tomshardware wrote:

Torvalds and the maintainers are acknowledging reality: developers are going to use AI tools to code faster, and trying to ban them is like trying to ban a specific brand of keyboard.
The bottom line is, if the code is good, then it's good. If it's hallucinatory AI slop that breaks the kernel, the human who clicked "submit" is the one who will have to answer to Linus Torvalds. In the open-source world, that's about as strong a deterrent as you can get.

https://www.tomshardware.com/software/l … -agreement

https://byteiota.com/torvalds-ai-linux- … velopment/

https://docs.kernel.org/process/coding-assistants.html

PS another thing is that AI is turning up many security vulnerabilities that have been undetected for decades. That's a plus, I'd say.

hhh · Today 00:28:09

Isn't AI just shite right now on a quality-of-life basis alone? You're AI prompt gets fed into a huge, incredibly loud, ground-water sucking datacenter, doesn't it?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 … n-lawsuits

johnraff · Today 02:55:51

^ But that datacentre is probably in the US, not here, so it's you guys' problem.
Fix your politics and the rest will probably follow.

But of course you're right - all this AGI or bust is contributing to the end of our livable world.

We all just need to take a deep breath, enjoy what we already have and drop the fanatical cult stuff.

Last edited by johnraff (Today 02:58:29)

Sector11 · Today 04:18:08

johnraff wrote:

{ s n i p }
But of course you're right - all this AGI or bust is contributing to the end of our livable world.
We all just need to take a deep breath, enjoy what we already have and drop the fanatical cult stuff.

N A I L E D I T !°!°!

breathe in ... 2 ... 3
out ... 2 ... 3
in ... 2 ... 3
{don't hold your breath}

Döbbie03 · Today 07:06:09

I would like to see this topic to be renamed as "SI discussions" as according to Trumpy there is nothing artificial about this "intelligence" and it is in fact a "super" intelligence.

It's super duper. Doesn't scrape the internet for others work at all, no, it creates everything it touches. Who needs Michaelangelo, Beethoven, Linus or anyone else? SI forever.

This isn't an invitation for a political discussion, it's a tongue in cheek, sarcasm laden post.

Full disclaimer, I have vibe coded a ncmpcpp alternative with Claude. I see uses for AI, it's like the philips head screwdriver in your tool box though. Just one tool of many.

#101 2026-09-22 22:01:17

Re: AI discussions

#102 Yesterday 02:28:35

Re: AI discussions

#103 Yesterday 02:48:43

Re: AI discussions

#104 Today 00:28:09

Re: AI discussions

#105 Today 02:55:51

Re: AI discussions

#106 Today 04:18:08

Re: AI discussions

#107 Today 07:06:09

Re: AI discussions

Board footer