posted in Technology
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/
Replying to @themachinestops@lemmy.dbzer0.com
In his commit message:
[And this was a debug session from hell, enormously helped by an AI doing much of the grunt-work.
I’d like to call it my tireless helper, but the AI several times stated flat out that this was impossible and unsolvable and that we should just write a report about it.
I suspect those things have been trained by people who may not be quite as stubborn as I am.
But while the AI was ready to give up several times, it did keep adding debug code and analyzing it faithfully when I pushed. So credit where credit is due and I let the AI write the commit message above.
This is basically a one-liner fixing a bogus “round_up()” to a “round_down()”, but there were 24 patches adding more and more debug information to this, and 18 kernel boot to finally narrow it down to this. - Linus ]
Didn’t he state quite early on that LLMs were a good tool to spot bugs? Found this from 3 years ago: blog.mathieuacher.com/LinusTorvaldsLLM/
Hackers use LLMs to spot odd exploits so it makes sense developers use them too. The usage of LLMs in development likely won‘t make Linux better or safer overall, because bugs and exploits wouldn‘t have been found by either side without it in the first place. It‘s like pandora‘s box where Linus is kind of forced to use it. If that makes sense.
Replying to @CosmoNova@lemmy.world
Like an accelerating arms race.
Replying to @NuanceDemon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Yes, but this has always been the case before and after this phony “AI” bullshit.
Replying to @CosmoNova@lemmy.world
He might consider himself forced to use it to find bugs. He wouldn’t be forced to use it to write the fix.
(Now you might say he wasn’t or isn’t, but even if that were true for the kernel at large this doesn’t seem to be: www.theregister.com/os-platforms/2026/…/5285268 And this seems like mostly to be on Linus, for not stepping in here.)
Replying to @CosmoNova@lemmy.world
Following the hacker arm race is a good point. But also the number of bugs is not a bottomless pit. If an LLM allows to find more, and hopefully the test and reviews are good enough to limit the new opportunities to introduce some from LLMs, it should reduce the overall number of bugs and make the software generally safer.
also the number of bugs is not a bottomless pit.
Are you forgetting about Microsoft?
The frequency of bugs and exploits has increased exponentially since AI came about and I don’t think it’s due to hacker sophistication at all. Most of the advanced tools to find exploits aren’t available to the general public if they really exist at all.