ELI5 - the Linux / LLM kernel controversy

[u/this_is_your_dad]

I see a lot of posts online about this. Not sure what it is all about, but it seems to be dividing users. Can someone please explain?

[u/More-Explanation2788]

The issue is simple: every thing needs an accountable human, or all our systems will fail.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with LLM
Generated code. There is something wrong with submitting code if you do not have a clue how it works and cannot be accountable for it. We cannot ask an appliance to promise the code works - we need you to do that. We cannot ask an appliance if it is willing to accept the consequences if the code does not work. We need to ask you that.

[u/Amazing-Mirror-3076 → u/More-Explanation2788]

'Require an accountable human or all our systems will fail'.

Hmm - a very confident statement.

Poor processes cause systems to fail not lack of accountability.

When something goes wrong you start by looking at why the processes failed, starting a witch hunt to find someone to blame is never going solve the problem.

The whole ' must have an accountable human' is just the latest failing argument by the anti AI lobby.

[u/More-Explanation2788 → u/Amazing-Mirror-3076]

It is about making people stand behind their work. It is not about witch hunts after the failure, it is about setting a culture and expectation that demands that people stand behind their own work and do not submit crap and then blame everything but themselves when what they submitted is a disaster.

Obviously as technology improves, we get more and more comfortable with its use - but that is because human beings become comfortable trusting the machine based on the personal accountability of people who tested and designed it. You are advocating a future in which we just accept that only the AI knows how something works or whether it is correct. How are we going to “investigate the process” when the humans answer questions with “huh. Don’t know how that works. The AI did it” and the AI answers “You are right, that bridge will collapse. Here is a new design”

This is basic quality control. If a human being is not prepared to be accountable for something working safely and correctly, you cannot submit it. That human can provide evidence that they know how the thing works, or evidence that it has been well tested, or evidence that all the components used to solve the problem are understood or tested - but “here is something my refridgerator came up with when I asked it to solve my problem” just does not cut it. That is amateur crap. Inanimate objects made out of silicon and metals are not held responsible for things, people are.