this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2026
79 points (100.0% liked)

Linux

14795 readers
233 users here now

Welcome to c/linux!

Welcome to our thriving Linux community! Whether you're a seasoned Linux enthusiast or just starting your journey, we're excited to have you here. Explore, learn, and collaborate with like-minded individuals who share a passion for open-source software and the endless possibilities it offers. Together, let's dive into the world of Linux and embrace the power of freedom, customization, and innovation. Enjoy your stay and feel free to join the vibrant discussions that await you!

Rules:

  1. Stay on topic: Posts and discussions should be related to Linux, open source software, and related technologies.

  2. Be respectful: Treat fellow community members with respect and courtesy.

  3. Quality over quantity: Share informative and thought-provoking content.

  4. No spam or self-promotion: Avoid excessive self-promotion or spamming.

  5. No NSFW adult content

  6. Follow general lemmy guidelines.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
MigratingtoLemmy@lemmy.world
79
Torvalds Tells Kernel Devs To Stop Debating AI Slop — Bad Actors Won't Follow the Rules Anyway (www.theregister.com)
submitted 21 hours ago by noumenon@lemmy.world to c/linux@lemmy.world
5 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 7 points 14 hours ago

As I said in private elsewhere, I do not want any kernel development documentation to be some AI statement. We have enough people on both sides of the "sky is falling" and "it's going to revolutionize software engineering", I don't want some kernel development docs to take either stance.

It's why I strongly want this to be that "just a tool" statement.

And the AI slop issue is NOT going to be solved with documentation, and anybody who thinks it is either just naive, or wants to "make a statement".

Neither of which is a good reason for documentation.

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 23 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

Kinda based tbh, just refuse submissions from people that repeatedly submit shit regardless of if it's AI or not.

[–] hoshikarakitaridia@lemmy.world 6 points 13 hours ago

That's what I'm saying. Let's say 10% of the time the code is good. It doesn't matter where it came from, you test it and accept it.

If it's bad code from an AI, you will see it's bad code, if it's good code from an AI, you will see it's good. If it's bad code from an amateur, you will see it's bad. If it's good code from an amateur you will see it's good. If it's bad code from a professional you will see it's bad, and if it's good code from them you will see it's good.

You can complete ignore the source. And there's always a few people sources spamming PRs, but you will be able to block them.

AI never mattered, the code always did.

[–] okwhateverdude@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago

Exactly. You're responsible for the code that is submitted. I've seen good code come out of proficient centaurs. These are the peeps that know their craft well and can make the robots dance their tune. I've also seen shit code from people that obviously didn't read the output too closely, and let the robot go off the rails. The latter group is who needs to be strung up from the rafters.