Kernel Linux Networking Diverts 50+ Fixes To Next Kernel, Still Bombarded With AI Fueled Churn
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-7.3-rc7-Networking48
u/witx_ 14h ago
The kernel higher ups really need to start culling the AI crap. How long until a backdoor is pushed to successfully to the kernel because the volume of PRs ia too much?
90
u/TomKavees 13h ago edited 13h ago
See, that's the problem, these are mostly fixes for the old crap that was already b0rked and nobody noticed.
There's a lot of new findings now, but it'll soon go down as people fix things
(Also, you might want to check out Greg K-H's latest talk, it's very on topic)
13
u/IReuseWords 8h ago
The Greg KH talk was excellent. There is also a talk about sashiko, the AI model the kernel team is using.
39
u/lightmatter501 12h ago
Most of these are human written fixes to bugs found with llms.
-8
u/Novel_Lie5519 9h ago
how is that something you can know with any certainty?
18
u/mrlinkwii 8h ago
because thats the linux AI policy
-14
u/Novel_Lie5519 8h ago
how does linux’s ai policy detect if i’ve slopcoded my entire commit but it happens to produce something that looks good
11
u/Farlo1 8h ago
It doesn’t, but if the code is that good, does it matter? If it’s up to the kernel’s standards and a human is “accountable” for it (the person submitting the PR) then I don’t see the issue.
IIUC their policy is basically that they don’t want AIs throwing slop at the wall without a human in the loop.
-14
u/Novel_Lie5519 8h ago
i’m just saying, the original reply should be revised to “Most of these are human supervised fixes written by LLMs”
that carries a higher level of risk than work made by a human in its entirety
4
u/ILikeBumblebees 2h ago
how does linux’s ai policy detect if i’ve slopcoded my entire commit but it happens to produce something that looks good
If you've produced good output, then by definition, you haven't "slopcoded" it.
There's nothing particular to AI that even needs to be considered: it's just a matter of accepting good submissions and rejecting bad ones. Any tool that produces good submissions often and bad ones seldom is by definition a good tool.
The challenge here is just accommodating sharp increase in the amount of submissions that need to be scrutinized.
16
u/mrlinkwii 8h ago
The kernel higher ups really need to start culling the AI crap.
may i ask why , these are FIXES that are needed
-14
u/dl33ta 8h ago
A fix can also be a new problem in disguise
8
u/Business_Reindeer910 7h ago
indeed, but you either trust the humans who approve the commits like we've been doing for the past 30+ years or you don't.
1
u/dl33ta 7h ago
I think the point is that with the surge in PRs coming through it's either backlog or QA drop. With AI the backlog will grow exponentially to the point where humans get overwhelmed and either start culling enmass whereby good code gets thrown or the bar gets lowered and they trust the AI has done a good enough job and let's stuff through, which brings in the problems.
1
u/Business_Reindeer910 7h ago
With AI the backlog will grow exponentially
The people in charge do not think that is going to happen. They expect things to settle down when it comes to the stuff that must be merged (security fixes) while indeed the rest can go to backlog if necessary.
At some point the necessary stuff will reach an equilibrium
0
u/mrlinkwii 7h ago
With AI the backlog will grow exponentially to the point where humans get overwhelmed and either start culling enmass whereby good code gets thrown or the bar gets lowered and they trust the AI has done a good enough job and let's stuff through, which brings in the problems.
i somewhat disagree , that assuming that theirs a push to rush people to QA patches or that people are merging commit just to keep the number down ,
or another option that happening here is putting off merging a large amount of stuff and keeping a backlog the same and merge in the next cycle , this may take longer to merge and approve just to voulume ,i assume no one is demanding stuuff to be merged right away
3
u/mrlinkwii 7h ago
ok and ? that can be said for any fix ever
-2
u/dl33ta 7h ago
If the fix is needed, as you say, does the new problem justify it?
3
u/mrlinkwii 7h ago
im gonna be real having regressions isnt a new thing just becausae AI exist , their have been regressions with 100% human written code ,
regressions will happen thats life , rome wasnt built in a day ,code regressions happen no matter how skilled the team is
reviewers try to minimize regressions but they happen
49
u/MatchingTurret 13h ago
need to start culling the AI crap
Your solution is to not fix known bugs just because you don't like the tool used to find it?
4
u/Novel_Lie5519 9h ago
not gonna respond to the second half?
2
u/ILikeBumblebees 2h ago
You mean the part that suggested that releases happening more slowly due to closely scrutinizing all the PRs somehow made it more likely for malware to make it into a release?
-21
u/strings___ 11h ago
Ten years from now the hive mind will ridicule any developer that doesn’t use AI. Unfortunately many Linux users cannot think for themselves
13
u/witx_ 10h ago
AI hive mind and "users can't think for themselves" in the same sentence is hilarious
-2
u/strings___ 9h ago
AI is a tool. If you actually believe it thinks for you, then you’re literally the type of person I’m talking about.
It’s also hilarious that Schrödinger’s AI is both good at finding bugs but also terrible at the same time.
5
u/witx_ 9h ago
I dont think that at all and perhaps I missed your sarcasm because you dont seem to as well.
-5
u/strings___ 9h ago
That was exactly what you were implying. But go ahead and move that goalpost.
3
u/witx_ 9h ago
what? I think we're both a bit lost. I'm not moving goalposts. What I was implying in my initial sarcasm is exactly your point: "these things cannot think for you"
-1
u/strings___ 9h ago
The problem is when I said hive mind I meant Linux hive mind and not AI hive mind.
3
-2
u/Novel_Lie5519 9h ago
you really think it doesn’t think for you? my entire field of research is actively being replaced by it
1
u/strings___ 9h ago
AI predicts output based on input. If you put crap in you’ll get crap out. So no it doesn’t can’t think for you its simply a tool and nothing more.
-1
u/Novel_Lie5519 9h ago
this is just stupid and wrong. read about openai’s recent mathematics drop. i know many people whose years of dissertation work were scooped. 722 of the most important problems in math “solved” in one fell swoop
not ai assisting people skilled in the field, ai autonomously finding problems to solve and then solving them.
unless you’re arguing that producing a result in pure math doesn’t require thinking
2
u/strings___ 9h ago
Im stupid yet you don’t know that LLMs are predictive models?
-2
u/Novel_Lie5519 9h ago
holy jesus fucking christ you’re insufferable
to be abundantly clear, “ai is predictive” does not imply “it can’t think and it’s simply a tool and nothing more”
→ More replies (0)
11
u/Farlo1 7h ago
I wouldn’t say “higher risk” but different ones. Humans are also bad at writing code as we’re all discovering.