Post by @auzy1@lemmy.world

2026-10-16 23:20 UTC

The ethics sucks, but that’s an entirely different conversation. AI companies should be taxed and forced to pay royalties to creators imho (and yes, that would instantly kill the industry)… And, it should be Opt in specifically. But, that’s not what people are arguing about when calling the kernel “AI Slop”. The bad information I’ve seen is that standards have dropped and even claims that kernel patches aren’t being reviewed properly. Some are even suggesting that the only review that happens is AI. Bad AI patches are no different to Bad human patches… And the process has always been to identify bad patches specifically. The process doesn’t need to change If anything, the standards have actually been raised because initial code reviews with AI are possibly better at identifying code that doesn’t follow coding standards, identifying common bugs (or similar patch attempts that were tried in the past but don’t work), or obvious bugs

Replies (2)

@klankin@piefed.ca 2026-10-17 01:10

That is a good point and I agree, people might get lazy with AI but thats doing a disservice to the same people who were lazy without it tbh. The existing devs haven’t changed and there’s no reason to believe AI will change them more than anything else going on.

Open ##5072840
@naught101@lemmy.world 2026-10-17 01:13

Why is it an entirely different conversation? Or rather, why do you think that this conversation is not what the AI-opposition are concerned about? (At least some of us are) By analogy, many of us leaped in to social media 20 years ago. 15+ years later, there was wide recognition that the new technology brought with it a shitload of undesirable outcomes that were completely unpredictable at the outset. The same can be said of fossil fuel use, as well as factory automation. Why would you not take lessons from those? Especially given what you know about the arseholes running the GenAI companies?

Open ##5072872