In reply to a developer on one of the Linux kernel mailing lists, Linux creator Linus Torvalds firmly put a foot down to push back against anti-AI comments.
I suppose the big issue for me is that I’m also an artist and I view code similarly, especially when I combine code with my graphics. I understand though that with a large project you are going to have some amount of people using AI even if you try to filter them out, so I can partially understand his stance. However I really disagree with him when he says it’s a useful tool, given how AI causes brain rot, productivity losses, and environmental destruction.
As for productivity losses and environmental destruction, that’s sort of what I was referring to when I said “bonus points for cheaper and faster development”. The environmental destruction refers to energy usage. Productivity can be thought of as time usage. If AI can be cheaper than humans in both time and energy, then that’s a win.
There’s a related discussion about how the context here is mainly about finding vulnerabilies with AI. And that is one where AI does seem to be faster and cheaper than using humans. Since AI is now finding kernel vulnerabilities that have been lurking there for 15+ years.
Maybe code generation will get there too.
As an artist you might also be worried about how AI is trained on copyrighted data. But I personally don’t really care about copyright
While I am very anti-genAI, I’m much more okay with analytical AI as long as it’s not blindly trusted. Technically they don’t need an LLM as they could use something smaller and optimized just to find vulnerabilities. I still take issue with ethical and environmental concerns but I think there are solutions to them. We just need to slow down, take the time to do things right, and ditch the whole “move fast and break things” mindset commonly seen in tech, but I doubt that will ever happen.
I suppose the big issue for me is that I’m also an artist and I view code similarly, especially when I combine code with my graphics. I understand though that with a large project you are going to have some amount of people using AI even if you try to filter them out, so I can partially understand his stance. However I really disagree with him when he says it’s a useful tool, given how AI causes brain rot, productivity losses, and environmental destruction.
As for productivity losses and environmental destruction, that’s sort of what I was referring to when I said “bonus points for cheaper and faster development”. The environmental destruction refers to energy usage. Productivity can be thought of as time usage. If AI can be cheaper than humans in both time and energy, then that’s a win.
There’s a related discussion about how the context here is mainly about finding vulnerabilies with AI. And that is one where AI does seem to be faster and cheaper than using humans. Since AI is now finding kernel vulnerabilities that have been lurking there for 15+ years.
Maybe code generation will get there too.
As an artist you might also be worried about how AI is trained on copyrighted data. But I personally don’t really care about copyright
While I am very anti-genAI, I’m much more okay with analytical AI as long as it’s not blindly trusted. Technically they don’t need an LLM as they could use something smaller and optimized just to find vulnerabilities. I still take issue with ethical and environmental concerns but I think there are solutions to them. We just need to slow down, take the time to do things right, and ditch the whole “move fast and break things” mindset commonly seen in tech, but I doubt that will ever happen.
What’s your argument against generative AI but not analytical AI? From what I’ve seen the arguments for/against one also work for the other