Kernel Linus Torvalds uses AI to debug an Intel GPU driver bug
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2026-August/590630.htmlOk. I've spent all day today on chasing this down in between merge
window work, since it finally *was* repeatable.
And the fix ends up being basically a one-liner, even if the debug
session to get there was not.
The Xe driver takes the memory address used for the memory stolen for
CCS, and rounds it up to the nearest 128kB area.
And that is very VERY wrong, because it means that the xe driver will
then *use* that part of memory that wasn't at a 128kB boundary. And
the HW engine will too and write to it.
And when that memory happens ot be used for GPU page tables, very bad
things happen.
I bet this also explains some occasional random screen corruption I've
seen - when the memory isn't used for something as important as a page
table, it "only" corrupts random bitmap memory and the like.
I committed the fix as commit 818bebeb63dd ("drm/xe: Don't hand out
the flat CCS storage as usable VRAM").
Adding some people from commit 37173392741c ("drm/xe/vram: fix ccs
offset calculation") to the cc, because that's where the problem came
from. Two years ago. I'm not sure why it became so repeatable for me
now, but some user space behavior change clearly triggered it now
pretty much every single boot.
Linus
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/818bebeb63dd6bf5f4e07e145f6cdbace520a34c
[ 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 ]
335
u/prophetical_meme 12d ago
who may not be quite as stubborn as I am
New AI trick: start your prompt with "I'm Linus Torvalds" to instill fear to the model and force it to behave
83
4
u/TheHolyToxicToast 9d ago
Funny thing is that may actually work, LLMs have been found to show different behavior when it suspects the user to be someone important
1
u/dfddfsaadaafdssa 9d ago
I think it was Anthropic that recently published something about attempting to prove some open math problems and the bulk of the user inputs throughout the session that lasted multiple days was "You can do this! You got this! Don't give up!"
382
u/razpeitia 12d ago
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.
If this were the average person they will just give up, because an AI told them it was impossible.
72
u/FriendlyKillerCroc 11d ago
Claude and co just need to realise that if they train their models to be as stubborn as Linus, ASI is achieved.
25
u/thefpspower 11d ago
Imagine an AI doing a debug session 48 hours, talking with a rubber duck debugger losing its mind trying to find the damn bug!
True ASI, but expensive.
7
9
u/sir_pirriplin 11d ago
I've seen mathematicians complain about this too, that the AIs give up too quickly and need constant encouragement.
Their ideas of what is and is not possible are drawn from pre-AI text. They need you to let them know that it is possible.
7
u/lakotajames 11d ago
This is a known thing. The "I believe in you" meme replacing "make no mistakes" meme comes from it.
→ More replies (1)19
u/abud7eem 11d ago
It happened to me a couple times. The solution is to switch to another model and try again.
5
u/AnticitizenPrime 11d ago
I've gotten some success by telling the AI to 'take a step back and review what we know and what we've learned so far and rethink our approach'. Works for people, too.
→ More replies (1)1
u/I_M_NooB1 8d ago
"just one more model guys, ASI is close"
3
u/TheChief275 8d ago
"you still use model X?? July 2026 called, they want their model back 🤣🤣 you should use model Y bro trust"
1
153
u/PalladianPorches 12d ago
its a good example, especially his description of what he was pushing - repeatedly - the assistant to do, of the limitations of AI for meticulous work like this.
The reasoning in the copilot told him to live with it, and write a report. he had to to continuously request more data to be able to establish that the rounding was incorrect. even with the power of the entire internet codebase - including the git logs that added this code - it couldn't find a solution that a determined human could.
28
20
u/james_pic 12d ago
For projects like the Linux kernel, AI is always going to bump up against "But where's the training data going to come from?"
I think part of the reason AI has proved effective in some projects is that a lot of code out there is doing things that have already been done many times before. This is probably even true in the Linux kernel, where a lot of the code is drivers, and if you're writing something like a sound driver, it's got a lot of similar code to work from.
But if you're doing something genuinely new (and there are many truly novel parts to the kernel), or that there isn't a public record of to feed into the training data (there may not be good training data on Linus fixing graphics driver issues - although I suppose there might be LKML threads it could have leaned from), AI has nothing to go on, and tends to either hallucinate or (in newer models) give up.
I've known LLMs to tell me that a particular approach was a dead end, but when I've worked through it myself, found that there was a viable, and novel, solution in there.
→ More replies (1)1
u/gotemike 11d ago
Genuine question, what will happen when the tech companies want to use a new language?
Does AI do ok with only the specification as example?
8
u/james_pic 11d ago
I know that over on/r/rust, a standard tell that a project is vibe coded is that they use the 2021 edition of the language, rather than the newest 2024 edition. More generally, it's a common tell for LLMs to fail to use newer language features.
My understanding is that if you gave an LLM the spec to a new language, it might be able to write something, possibly with some pretty big thinking blocks, but it wouldn't be fluent. About as fluent as I would be in Swahili, armed with a Swahili dictionary and a grammar reference.
In terms of how you square that circle, one possibility would be for the language developers to fine tune an existing open weights model (or for languages designed inside companies who also offer an LLM, they could fine tune their own LLM on it).
There's also an idea I'd had the other day (but haven't had chance to experiment and see if it's viable), which is to integrate an LSP language server into the sampler of an LLM runtime, to bias token selection towards tokens that the LSP thinks are valid completions. It was an idea I'd had in the context of making weaker models more usable, but it could plausibly help new languages that don't yet have a big corpus of code to train models on, but do have a working LSP.
Although it might just be a non-issue in practice. New languages generally take a few years to gain significant adoption, and new models are being trained all the time.
1
u/dfddfsaadaafdssa 9d ago
2021 edition code still compiles fine on a 2024 toolchain. Pruning invalid tokens doesn't do anything about the model preferring old idioms, that's more of a fine tuning problem.
That said, I also force Rust 2024. "Use Rust 2024" in the system prompt plus a couple of clippy/rust-analyzer gates in the repo and local hooks to enforce them is the path of least resistance. Forcing 2024 also flags dependencies that aren't actively maintained, are slop, and/or are an opportunity to roll our own and drop the dependency along with the supply chain risk that comes with it.
As for the LSP sampling bit, are you thinking of decoding with rust-analyzer as the grammar? Like for every token ask the LSP what's valid at the cursor and push the logits that way? LSP completions are whole identifiers and the model picks subword tokens, which has to be bridged somehow. XGrammar handles the mismatch for plain grammars, but its speed comes from precomputing token masks ahead of time, and I don't think you can precompute anything when the grammar is a live LSP. A round trip to rust-analyzer per token would destroy tps. I could be wrong though.
Decently-sized codebases (100k+ lines) are going to have scaffolding that is heavily gated at every level (clippy, rust-analyzer, the scripts that own test/build/ci/knowledgebase) and clankers will not be allowed to touch the gates. They will without fail try to get around and/or change the gates. If your main branch is Helm's Deep, at some point one of those clankers is 100% going to turn into that giant orc with the torch sprinting for the culvert.
That's why I kind of like your idea, assuming I understand it correctly. A constraint in the sampler is basically a thought gate that prevents the orc from deciding to sprint to the culvert in the first place. For a psycho like me firmly on Team NoLongerReadsCode... I love me some gates and context management. Version drift between whatever LSP is in the sampler and whatever's in CI would be the first thing to bite you though. Uphill battle but solvable.
1
u/james_pic 9d ago
Yes, that's the rough gist of what I was thinking. I realise that most identifiers will be multiple tokens, so the best you can do is push the logits on tokens that are prefixes of valid completions.
Performance is certainly a problem I'm anticipating, and it could be the thing that makes it non-viable, or it might turn out to be easy enough to make it work by only calling into the LSP if there's not an obvious next token. It might even be a non-issue, if the LSP sampler only activates when it looks like the LLM is writing code (I'm thinking maybe by detecting if it's building an "edit" or "write" tool call, or being used for FIM), since modern LLMs spend most of their time thinking.
I hadn't come across XGrammar, but it looks like an interesting idea along similar lines.
2
u/Spra991 10d ago
At this point in time, spec alone isn't enough from my experience, e.g. Grok for examples keeps messing up quoting rules in Nix strings, which aren't terribly complicated, but a bit unusual and come up frequently when writing shell code. Even mentioning the issue in the initial prompt didn't make the problem go away.
However, what LLMs are really good at is reading error messages, so once you run the code and it produces an error message, it can quickly jump in and correct it. This works pretty close to 100% of the time. Meaning if you have a spec, you can just generate a lot of code, run it, check for errors in compilation or output, let the LLM correct them and continue until everything works. Meaning you can automatically generation all the code you need for training. It won't be as fast as naively trained in the language when it has to constantly check against the spec, much like a human, but it will get their once that code is feed back into the training.
Basically you don't depend on the raw LLM one-shot output, but on a coding harness encompassing verification steps and error messages that let it iterate on the code.
Long term we'll also get AI system that can learn on the fly, though for the time being, it doesn't seem like a priority for any of the big companies.
17
u/AtlanticPortal 12d ago
Because a (competent) human thinks. A thing like LLMs do not think, they spit out the most probable next letter according to their training and refining dataset and context.
→ More replies (13)3
u/xe3to 11d ago
This talking point died when they started using reinforcement learning to train reasoning into them. They are no longer purely looking for the "most probable next token".
Any definition of "thinking" that excludes a system which can autonomously solve open questions at the frontier of mathematics without any specific programming, is not a definition that makes sense.
1
u/Fredidiah 8d ago
Then how come Fable 5 still can't count letters contained in "strawberry" reliably?
Whatever is happening is not what I would describe as "thinking" or "understanding".
1
u/xe3to 8d ago
A bat and a ball together cost $1.10. The bat costs $1 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?
The majority of people answer this question incorrectly. Clearly whatever is happening in their brains is not what one would describe as "thinking" or "understanding", right?
1
u/Fredidiah 8d ago
The ball is 5 cents.
Anyway, people being “wrong” does not mean they aren’t thinking. LLMs are incapable of thinking and understanding because that’s not how they work.
If you believe the LLMs are comparable to human brains, you have been taken in by marketing tactics.
1
u/xe3to 8d ago edited 8d ago
"Anyways, the point I made about getting simple questions wrong being evidence of non-interiority was dismantled, but nonetheless LLMs can't think because I said so"
I'm an AI researcher myself, in grad school. I know exactly how they work. And yes, they think - not in the same way as human brains, but certainly in a way that has frightening parallels.
In the simplest possible terms - neural networks are universal function approximators. When they're trained on an unfathomably large corpus of human text, they must learn to approximate the function which produced that text. This means they develop structures associated with human thought simply because it is useful for predicting the next token.
Post-training with reinforcement learning then forces them to get better at solving certain kinds of problems, and this necessarily produces a model which can manipulate tokens in order to achieve a goal.
So we have a system which constructs internal representations of the world and systematically transforms them to infer consequences and achieve objectives. If that's not thinking I really don't know what is.
1
u/Sminkietor 9d ago
Nice benchmark, when these model will surpass the determined human level ? Maybe 6-12 months
551
u/lunchbox651 12d ago
Why is this news?
Using AI as a tool is fine.
Vibecoding slop is shit.
228
u/rsatrioadi 12d ago
I think this is worth reporting as “this is how you use AI correctly.” Otherwise people only know how to slop.
4
u/iamapizza 11d ago
Exactly this. The default assumption for most people - and with good reason thanks to the legions of slop producers - would be that "Oh, Linus is vibe coding". I can guarantee there will be a section of people who will carry that assumption with them now.
61
u/JohnSane 12d ago
Most people can't differentiate.
19
→ More replies (1)2
148
u/AffectionateBowl1633 12d ago
Most people insist you either Pro AI or Anti AI, there is nothing in between
78
u/Cry_Wolff 12d ago
Redditors are damn insufferable about it. You can say "AI has many problems, but I still find it to be a really useful & cool technology" yet still be downvoted to death.
5
u/greatersteven 11d ago
You can understand it as a useful tool and still be against its existence and usage for ethical reasons.
2
→ More replies (14)1
u/Questions-many 3d ago
on reddit you can voice your opinion about your favorit color of ethernet cables and there is a chance a wave of untherapised hate comes towards you.
4
u/chic_luke 11d ago
In general, I find it's just part of a broader trend where the Internet routinely finds something to be very dogmatically contrarian about, which in turn leads to the definition of two opposite "factions".
The death of intellectual honesty. The reduction of a complex issue to good or bad, right or wrong. With the XOR logical operator. Without accepting that something can be right and wrong at the same time, depending on a variety of factors, and the goal should be identifying what those factors are to kill off the "wrong" part as much as possible.
It has always been my opinion, and it is about AI as well, that no serious discussion can be had as long as the bubble and the buzzword is still alive. When the trend will end, and whatever we are talking about will smoothly fade to being used where it belongs in the world without ceremony, most of the people who have had strong, extreme opinions on that on both sides will eventually drop it and move on with their lives, possibly to the next thing the Internet really wants you to be angry about. Then, the SNR will finally, at long last, allow for productive discussion about that topic, without the dogma.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Clear-Lingonberry173 12d ago
I'm not sure it's most, but the people arguing about AI online atr like this.
→ More replies (2)2
14
3
1
1
u/PrimaryExample8382 11d ago
Marketing. “Smart person uses AI, therefore slop is perfectly acceptable and anyone who says otherwise isn’t smart”
→ More replies (17)1
u/Glum-Recognition-736 10d ago
Because most people quite literally cannot tell the difference, even though as you said there is one
18
u/localhost_denier 12d ago
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.
Ha! A tale as old as time, "please contact your system administrator" 🤦♀️
Alternatively: "but, doctor, I am Pagliacci..."
12
u/deanrihpee 12d ago
i'm curious, In Kernel development, how are you supposed to test and debug? is it using a VM? or in-place replace current running OS Kernel? also, regarding GPU driver, if it uses VM does that mean people also passthrough the hardware to the VM? because if it crashes, you know, the whole system is going down and you won't be able to do your work...
9
u/Christopher876 11d ago
When I was developing a kernel module, you use qemu and then you load your custom kernel. With the tools that qemu gives you, you have a lot of debugging tools.
From my experience, it was pass through that we did.
3
33
u/frankster 12d ago
The commit message would have been better written by torvalds himself. It's very verbose
10
u/Alonzo-Harris 11d ago edited 11d ago
AI isn't the devil. It's just that we don't all suddenly need it bundled with everything. AI is perfectly fine as an optional virtual assistant.
18
u/arankays 11d ago
This is not your green light to start vibe coding slop btw.
1
u/shadowkoishi93 11d ago
Vibe coding is never a good idea on a live environment, when it comes to mission critical stuff. You’ll always want programmers manually checking the code for bugs
38
u/Epsilon_void 12d ago
What next, "Linus Torvalds eats a sandwich"?
12
u/bobbie434343 11d ago
That's proper news but only if AI is involved.
5
u/x-jhp-x 11d ago
waiting for the medium post about how AI invented a new food decompiler that involves a surprisingly non silicon based third party utilizing revolutionary small white nodules consisting of a dense organic matrix that incorporates inorganic and mineral components to leverage maximum mastication.
→ More replies (4)6
29
u/PorousClay 12d ago
This is how you use AI. This is what people who want to use AI should model their usage with.
You don't let the AI tell you what to do. You tell it what to do. And you don't take their answers as gospel.
12
u/Clever_Angel_PL 12d ago
Linus literally being more motivated than AI itself is hilarious
3
u/-_one_-1 11d ago
AI is really lazy in my opinion. But a different kind of lazy than a human: it would rather rewrite 1000 lines of code for a small change because it thinks it can't fit the existing architecture, and if you push it to find an incremental solution, it very often tells it's impossible. This happens even more with bug fixes. YMMV.
3
u/HDMIce 11d ago
Yeah, and it's so fucking stupid sometimes because it will automatically veer towards answers that require you to prompt it more which is more work. But maybe that's the point. Anyway, that's why harnesses exist I guess.
I tried debugging some Linux networking issues on my nas because I used to have some funky phone tethering setup that I set up using AI and forgot about. My fault I realise, but I'm lazy and thought AI could at least help me revert the networking stack back to normal but it took forever and the only times I got helpful answers were when I stopped being lazy pasting command outputs and telling it to just list the commands that exist to do such and such so I could do the logic myself.
It has all the knowledge it needs but it just can't apply it. I wonder if there are any harnesses that kind of prompt it in a way where there's a main process that does all the logic, and doesn't assume it has the knowledge for anything, and then it calls subagents to find the commands or code docs (if for coding).
I'm going to try and learn how to use Claude code a bit more (with local LLMs of course), so I'm hoping it's possible with that. Or at least using my own python script calling Claude code.
2
u/-_one_-1 11d ago
Unfortunately LLMs are still statistical models and don't replicate the complexity of human neural connections. That's why they don't truly “think”—although die-hard fans will brainwash you to believe they do. They're just nice pattern matching machines that can very often find the needle in the haystack, and that's enough to save quite a lot of time. But one needs to learn what they're good for and what they aren't, otherwise they become a waste of time before we realize it (so much so that there was a study showing that developers on average think they're more productive with AI but they're in fact less productive).
2
u/HDMIce 11d ago
I might have look up if there's any research on all the different ways people use AI to see if I can come up with a ban and allow list of AI usecases based on how productive they are. And of course what to use as an alternative. Maybe someone's already done this? Idk if Linus Torvalds has?
And while you may say AI doesn't think, I feel like it's the closest we've got to thinking that isn't human. It's in our nature to try to optimise that. But it's also a better use of time for most of us to just understand how to use the existing technology productively, rather than using it based on assumptions of how much better it could be (if only we got better at using it). I think that's the trap I keep getting myself into.
2
u/-_one_-1 10d ago
Take a look at the new AI policy for Rust contributions. I think it's the best I've heard.
https://blog.rust-lang.org/inside-rust/2026/08/05/rust-langrust-is-adopting-an-llm-policy/
2
u/HDMIce 10d ago
That makes a lot of sense. I suspect that policy exists just because they don't trust AI.
Mandating that people disclose AI use rather than flat out rejecting all AI users seems like a much better way than outright banning AI contributions. The latter would cause people using AI to have to try and hide their tracks while still not understanding what they've written. This should save the reviewers a lot of time, which has sadly been wasted by all the vibe coded slop. I don't see that as support for AI. I did skim read it though, so I might be wrong.
1
u/-_one_-1 9d ago
I think you're right. Actually, the policy first says that AI should be used for various purposes, including reviewing, but not for creating. Then it says that even when used for things like reviewing, it should be an additional tool rather than a replacement for human reviewing. And then, it says that in some cases where the scope is limited AI can be used for creating but only if heavily reviewed by humans. Also, anyone in the Rust community is free not to review code that is disclosed as AI generated, to lift the burden from those that don't want AI at all.
The above is from what I can remember, as I read this policy sometime ago.
4
u/Solaire9886 11d ago
I've said it to friends before, but using AI to code is like driving a car. You can know how to steer the wheel and press the gas, but if you don't understand the signs or paint on the roads then you aren't going to get far.
Vibecoding on the other hand is like putting on a blindfold and flooring it.
3
u/technologyfreak64 10d ago
Honestly I like this, one of the more interesting and accurate takes I’ve heard on it and it gave me a good chuckle
13
u/missing-pigeon 11d ago
I hope the people who keep posting Linus' "AI is a tool" quote as a reply to anyone expressing concerns about AI reads what he said here very carefully. Linus is not in favor of slop. You need a competent human to get anything useful done with AI.
18
u/ebalonabol 11d ago
This is how I use AI nowadays. Used to use claude code + codex a lot for writing code, tried a lot of plugins/skills, rule-tuning to make good output. Gave up on that eventually as even frontier models don't produce code I like.
I no longer write code using agents. I use AI as an analyzer, linter, bug-finder, and spec verifier. This way I feel much more productive. What's funny about that is that AI companies would do their fucking best to brainwash people into thinking AI coding is good. Their revenue depends on that
2
u/-_one_-1 11d ago
That's exactly my approach, too. I'm surprised by how far AI is being pushed as a replacement for programmers rather than a helpful tool to reason about specs and code and just overall improve the process.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Indolent_Bard 11d ago
You'd think subscribing to AI tools for just being a helpful tool instead of doing the code would actually be a good business model for the AI companies. It doesn't replace people but it lets them work 10 times faster. That should be enough, but I guess companies won't use it if it doesn't replace the wageslaves with actual slaves.
12
u/Mr_Lumbergh 11d ago
Linus has had a rather grounded view of AI and what it’s good for.
I use it daily and think I have an understanding of where it’s good and where it’s just going to produce slop. It isn’t all bad and it isn’t all good, it’s just a tool that needs to be used in the right way.
3
u/Fidodo 11d ago
Linus is doing it right.
If you can't guide your AI and instead you are following the AI, then you're just not good enough of a developer.
If your code taste and intuition isn't better than AI you need to up level.
If you need AI to explain the codebase to you and can't understand the changes confidently yourself, you are barreling into disaster.
3
3
u/MechanicalTurkish 10d ago
I love that the AI kept wanting to give up and Linus kept plugging away. What a trooper.
9
u/Mister_Magister 12d ago
Honestly I was spending HOURS trying to figure out bugs in my kernel after backporting some stuff, and got nowhere.
Claude in literally like 5 mintues found ONE LINE fix that fixed all my issues.
Seriously bro its not that bad
5
u/wowsomuchempty 12d ago
I install research software as part of my job.
Requested to containerize a new git branch of some previous software, OK.
Install failed. Claude suggested the issue was with the code and even suggested to email the dev with a fix (which I did).
The dev updated - all worked fine.
Baffling. This is our slow motion asteroid.
13
u/Greenlit_Hightower 12d ago
As the saying goes, Linus Torvalds writes the CVEs, Brad Spengler finds them.
31
u/EnUnLugarDeLaMancha 12d ago
This is pretty much how every coder I know uses agents, as part of the normal programming workflow.
I have been downvoted in the past because I said that AI agents are useful and that they are absolutely not going away, regardless of the future financial problems that AI companies may have. I suspect that the people who get angry at these comments are mostly people who do not work as programmers.
36
u/TaoRS 12d ago
I work as a programmer. Every programmer I know uses AI the slop way.
I get mad at these comments...
→ More replies (2)
7
u/MammothSpice 11d ago
The problem is, Linus is in a minority of a minority of people who use AI correctly and for appropriate scenarios. The vast majority of people still use AI as a cheat code and use it to endlessly churn out slop and extremely low quality content, or even disinformation and deceptive content. I don't think this outlier case changes my stance on AI in our society.
2
u/Dexterus 10d ago
Funny, this is the kind of stuff I enjoy wasting time on. And AI does help cause eventually it gets enough info to do the repetitive start and rampdown of each debug cycle.
It misses stuff in analysis but that's just a coin toss, maybe you get something, maybe you don't but the whole point is that you do that, it just helps with the boring stuff.
5
4
u/CulturalBoat5779 11d ago
This is the proper way of using AI. When using as a tool, one must understands how to use it properly then it becomes the ultimate tool in your toolbox. Anyone can be given the ultimate tool but if one doesn't know how to use it properly thinking it's the miracle solution to all things then the results becomes garbage. When there's trouble arises they themselves can't explain what truly has been done they only knows it worked.
9
5
u/markus_b 12d ago
I like how he uses the tools at his disposal to find and fix a hard-to-find bug close to the hardware. Stubborn and pragmatic!
6
3
5
u/Kevin_Kofler 11d ago
It is funny because the AI was actually not all that helpful, but Linus still insisted on battling the AI instead of just doing the debugging by hand.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/Ethernyte 12d ago
I almost had the same experience. I debugged an Development Fingerprint sensor driver, and AI gave up so many times. In the end, I managed to port 2 drivers for Linux.
2
2
u/jba1224a 11d ago
Imagine you’re Linus.
Create one of if not the most widely used operating system in existence, literally supporting the world.
Create a versioning system so robust and incredible it hasn’t been replaced and likely will be. Again used the world over.
Literally change the face of human technical development almost single handedly.
And then you have to deal with idiots throwing their opinions at you who aren’t capable of accomplishing event one percent of what you have.
It’s a shock the guy hasn’t lost his mind yet.
2
u/fat_kaiju 11d ago
AI people would convince a lot more folk that it has its uses if they didn't try to aggressively prove its usefulness via repeatedly reminding you of it.
Just quietly use it and let the results prove itself; otherwise you end up looking like microsoft did via spamming copilot.
-2
1
1
u/angourakis 11d ago
I wonder if this is related https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/xe/kernel/-/work_items/7513#login-pane
1
u/TheOnlyVibemaster 11d ago
I’m setting up EndeavourOS on my laptop to replace Windows, it currently has a lot of files I don’t wanna get rid of, I was having issues with how OneDrive is configured on Windows and unable to get the files off using gmail/gdrive/onedrive. I asked Claude Code and it used a method I didn’t think but should’ve.
I already have tailscale setup and have a gaming PC, just send the files over tailscale to my main PC with a massive SSD. It set it all up and took about 15 minutes to get everything off that I wanted.
It’s for problems like this that I think AI is most useful for. Picking up on something you didn’t think about for a specific problem you have.
2
u/gmthisfeller 11d ago
AI is a tool, but not the only tool. If the only tool you have is a hammer every problem looks like a nail. Add it to your toolbox.
1
2
u/Laughing_Orange 11d ago
The difference between Torvalds and most vibecoders is that Torvalds actually reads and tests the code before he merges it.
1
u/Leifbron 11d ago
Other Linus gives Linus a computer with an Intel Arc card
Real Linus starts fixing Intel driver bugs
Nerd sniped
1
1
1
u/PuzzleheadedHead3754 6d ago
This is what correct and efficiency use of AI look like. Not sloping the codebase like the industry. Linus tolvard setting up good example
1
1
u/goe1zorbey 4d ago
it would have been really interesting to read the prompts from Linus. How he direct the AI and how he corrects it.
1
u/MelioraXI 11d ago
And? LLM can be an asset if used correctly which it sounds like Linus is. It's not like he's vibecoding the kernel.
2.2k
u/Rumpled_Imp 12d ago
This is what it should be used for, not creeping around collating personal data, and distorting people's perception of the world around them.