Linus Torvalds used AI to fix a Linux bug, and now LLM critics on Linux face an uncomfortable choice

lists.debian.org/debian-project/…/msg00041.html

www.xda-developers.com/linus-used-ai-bug-llm-critics-face-choice/

AI is like a power tool. If you give a contractor a nail gun instead of a hammer he can build a house faster. If you give someone who has no idea how to build a house a nail gun they’ll just fail at building a house faster than if you only gave them a hammer and they’ll probably hurt themselves.

I think there could be some potential usecases for LLMs, but that’s not code generation (at least code that is not in the finished product), nor having it look up stuff in technical documentation.

Everyone is trying to chase the rational adaptation case. Everyone wants to 10x their projects, yet keep control over them, or at least 2x their productivity. But I’ve seen just as many people going insane from at least first trying to use it as a tool as vibe coders.

Code is probably one of the easiest things to verify, for that reason I struggle to see any other viable uses for LLMs tbh.

user: write code that correctly asserts what 1+1 equals.
LLM: assert_eq!(1 + 1, 4);
LLM: hmmm, that crashed.
LLM: assert_eq!(1 + 1, 3);
LLM: hmmm, that also crashed, I must be doing something wrong, let me try one more time.
LLM: assert_eq!(1 + 1, 2);
LLM: that worked!
LLM Response: assert_eq!(1 + 1, 2);

user: what does this sentence mean? "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"
LLM Response: This doesn't mean anything, or someone really likes buffalo's

I can always run the code to check, I still don’t know how that sentence makes sense.