And when the day comes, and it will, when something is submitted and approved and breaks shit then people can turn to the devs and Linus and say “I told you so.”
my decision a few months ago to start daily driving BSD doesn’t seem to be a bad one.
Thomas de Grivel made clear the chances of accepting code with such a murky copyright situation were effectively nil, and he said on March 23 that he would remove all the LLM-generated code and keep only what he wrote himself.
then people can turn to the devs and Linus and say “I told you so.”
I bet his response will be an email with a dozen variations of “fuck you for insinuating that I have any responsibility, I didn’t approve that specific commit, it’s all <approver>'s fault who is a fucking imbecile”
when the day comes, and it will, when something is submitted and approved and breaks shit
That day has been coming, over 300 times a year for the past 30 years. People submit things that break shit all-the-time, the system is setup to deal with it, that’s the actual genius of FOSS development procedures, they’re built to handle it.
Now, the firehose isn’t just opened, the hydrant has been knocked off entirely, and there will be some growing pains to deal with the volume, but the basic procedures are well developed and I find that applying them to LLM outputs (before passing those outputs anywhere off my own desk) goes a very long way toward refining slop into genuinely robust solutions.
let them. Seriously, let them do it.
And when the day comes, and it will, when something is submitted and approved and breaks shit then people can turn to the devs and Linus and say “I told you so.”
my decision a few months ago to start daily driving BSD doesn’t seem to be a bad one.
FreeBSD and OpenBSD both allow AI and contain AI-generated code. NetBSD requires prior approval but doesn’t outright ban it.
OpenBSD doesn’t allow it, what are you on about?
https://lwn.net/Articles/1064541/
Thomas de Grivel made clear the chances of accepting code with such a murky copyright situation were effectively nil, and he said on March 23 that he would remove all the LLM-generated code and keep only what he wrote himself.
open-slopware calls OpenBSD having a “Permissive AI Policy” and links to this commit as evidence.
Not to defend AI, but this already happens in the kernel, often. It has been this way since long before LLMs were around.
Yeah, they literally just had an rc of 6.18 that doesn’t compile.
I bet his response will be an email with a dozen variations of “fuck you for insinuating that I have any responsibility, I didn’t approve that specific commit, it’s all <approver>'s fault who is a fucking imbecile”
And, as always, he’s not wrong.
Linus fully approves this. What imagination land do you live in?
That day has been coming, over 300 times a year for the past 30 years. People submit things that break shit all-the-time, the system is setup to deal with it, that’s the actual genius of FOSS development procedures, they’re built to handle it.
Now, the firehose isn’t just opened, the hydrant has been knocked off entirely, and there will be some growing pains to deal with the volume, but the basic procedures are well developed and I find that applying them to LLM outputs (before passing those outputs anywhere off my own desk) goes a very long way toward refining slop into genuinely robust solutions.