AI can speed up a lot of the manual labour needed to bring even an almost dead, 10-year-old device back to life. My Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (oxygen, MSM8953) was dead. With AI help and my own knowledge, I ported/rewrote the missing drivers, and it now runs Nura (postmarketOS) with working camera, torch, SIM, phone calls and SMS. Only the loudspeaker is still broken.

Everything is up for anyone who wants to install it, or to understand the changes and manually write the patches for mainline: https://github.com/sv1sjp/mi-max2-oxygen-msm8953-nura-drivers Testing, feedback and PRs welcome.

  • Shayeta@feddit.orgEnglish
    1·
    8 days ago

    It’s literally the first sentence of their policy.

    Yes, but what about the 2nd sentence?

    The following is not allowed in Nura:

    • Submitting contributions fully or in part created by generative AI tools to Nura.
    • Recommending generative AI tools to other community members for solving problems in the Nura space.

    As you can see, it says nothing about researching, troubleshooting, reverse-engineering, etc. As long as you write and understand the code yourself AI is allowed for everything else. As long as you’re not using generative AI it’s fine.

    Citation needed.

    My personal experience working with AI over the past year. And if that’s not enough, here’s also Linus Torvalds himself.

    The arguments regarding resource use and profiting off of theft are valid. The arguments regarding the nature and capabilities of the tech are not. Developers ARE responsible for the code they submit, regardless of how it was created.

    • Arthur Besse@lemmy.mlMEnglish
      0·
      8 days ago

      As you can see, it says nothing about researching, troubleshooting, reverse-engineering, etc. As long as you write and understand the code yourself AI is allowed for everything else. As long as you’re not using generative AI it’s fine.

      I’m not sure if you’re joking or legitimately confused, but, assuming the latter, fyi the “AI” that people use for “researching, troubleshooting, reverse-engineering, etc” is part of what is called “generative AI”. Given this, it’s not much a stretch to read it as saying that even posting in Nura forums about the existence of @sv1sjp@lemmy.world’s github repo would actually be a violation of Nura’s policy (as of today; I expect it will evolve in the not-too-distant future).

      • Shayeta@feddit.orgEnglish
        1·
        8 days ago

        That’s fair. It would certainly align with the described “spirit” of the policy. Hopefully it becomes clearer in the future.

    • erebion@news.erebion.euEnglish
      0·
      8 days ago

      It’s not a good tool for research, it will just generate a hallucination and you end up doing something which does not work or just works somehow, but is not done correctly and will break in the future.

      I talked to quite a few people recently at the postmarketOS and Alpine Linux conference, it definitely was noticed that more contributions are now coming in that do things wrong or in a subtly broken way and the submitting people have no clue.

      If you rely on a lying computer for research, then your code will lie to you.

      • Shayeta@feddit.orgEnglish
        1·
        8 days ago

        I rely on it to scour the docs, the forums, the codebases for any and all potential solutions and neatly present them to me. I then validate and evaluate myself. Just going with the first thing the AI suggests is lunacy and is exactly what I meant by “people are still discovering best practices”.

      • sudoer777@lemmy.mlEnglish
        1·
        8 days ago

        I’ve used AI for low level debugging on things that are basically undocumented to fix my personal machines, doesn’t eliminate the trial and error process but it’s gotten me farther a lot faster than if I were to do it on my own.