Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. I saw a wild take where someone said distributions are fascist for using systemd because systemd now uses Claude for code review.

I saw a wild take where someone said distributions are fascist for using systemd because systemd now uses Claude for code review.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
76 Posts 31 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • bluca@fosstodon.orgB bluca@fosstodon.org

    @lanodan @ariadne @thesamesam our security bug bounty in systemd was 99.99% garbage until end of last year. Since then these tools have got way better, and I'd say there's a ~10% valid security bugs, ~70% valid bugs but not security relevant, and ~20% garbage. I'll happily take the 10% of real, valid issue found for the price of having to shoot down ~20% of garbage. The key is to have no mercy - there's no arguing or bargaining involved, a crap report gets binned, end of, no discussions

    bluca@fosstodon.orgB This user is from outside of this forum
    bluca@fosstodon.orgB This user is from outside of this forum
    bluca@fosstodon.org
    wrote last edited by
    #58

    @lanodan @ariadne @thesamesam the 70% of valid-bugs-but-not-vulnerabilities is kinda 50-50 our fault and the bots fault. The bots fault because it's a dumb LLM in the end, it doesn't understand the big picture (well doesn't "understand", full stop). Our fault because a lot of the security models are pretty much implicit, and scarcely documented if at all, so the bot has nothing to keep it grounded to reality

    ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • bluca@fosstodon.orgB bluca@fosstodon.org

      @lanodan @ariadne @thesamesam the 70% of valid-bugs-but-not-vulnerabilities is kinda 50-50 our fault and the bots fault. The bots fault because it's a dumb LLM in the end, it doesn't understand the big picture (well doesn't "understand", full stop). Our fault because a lot of the security models are pretty much implicit, and scarcely documented if at all, so the bot has nothing to keep it grounded to reality

      ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
      ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
      ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
      wrote last edited by
      #59

      @bluca @lanodan @thesamesam yes, in our own experiments at work, we are having to write a lot into the system prompt in order to inform claude about the threat model.

      otherwise it does silly things like "zones have device nodes in them that allow accessing hypervisor services"

      well, yes.

      i would hope so.

      considering that it's running in a hypervisor, and you need those services to access secure enclaves, for example.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

        @bluca @thesamesam @lanodan oh yes, we have been experimenting with it at work for reviews.

        it has indeed gotten pretty good.

        but i hesitate becoming dependent on it as a FOSS maintainer because while the first hit is free, when the economic reality catches up... it will probably be quite expensive.

        bluca@fosstodon.orgB This user is from outside of this forum
        bluca@fosstodon.orgB This user is from outside of this forum
        bluca@fosstodon.org
        wrote last edited by
        #60

        @ariadne @thesamesam @lanodan yeah that's obviously the end goal of all this wild and absurd speculation, but capitalism gotta capitalism. At some point the bubble will pop and then we'll see what's left standing

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • omnirabbit@social.treehouse.systemsO omnirabbit@social.treehouse.systems

          @ariadne I don't want to see the world eaten by AI but people use the tool and it drives results for them. There's nowhere much else to go.
          It's like Stallman arguing for owning every piece of your machine - eventually, you have some closed source firmware blob. Purity vs reality.

          oblomov@sociale.networkO This user is from outside of this forum
          oblomov@sociale.networkO This user is from outside of this forum
          oblomov@sociale.network
          wrote last edited by
          #61

          @omnirabbit @ariadne I'm a pragmatist, but do appreciate it there being an effort to denounce and fight these kinds of involutions, even when it is taken to extremes I disagree with. It's the most practical example of the Overton window. Without the shift to the opposite extreme, the situation would devolve much faster.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • omnirabbit@social.treehouse.systemsO omnirabbit@social.treehouse.systems

            @ariadne also, you should be more concerned about whether you are actually doing fascism (i.e. snitching on your neighbors, working for the actual fascist goon army) versus vague ideological debates that the people doing Real Fascism will never even give a second thought to.

            if systemd is actually fascist. You Will Know.

            oblomov@sociale.networkO This user is from outside of this forum
            oblomov@sociale.networkO This user is from outside of this forum
            oblomov@sociale.network
            wrote last edited by
            #62

            @omnirabbit @ariadne (let's say that the age thing doesn't shine a positive light on systemd either)

            ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • oblomov@sociale.networkO oblomov@sociale.network

              @omnirabbit @ariadne (let's say that the age thing doesn't shine a positive light on systemd either)

              ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
              ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
              ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
              wrote last edited by
              #63

              @oblomov @omnirabbit what "age thing"

              it's a fucking optional field in a user database for birthdate

              they aren't enforcing anything or anything like that.

              it is a field in a schema.

              vcard also has a field for birthdate. is it also fascist?

              oblomov@sociale.networkO 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

                @oblomov @omnirabbit what "age thing"

                it's a fucking optional field in a user database for birthdate

                they aren't enforcing anything or anything like that.

                it is a field in a schema.

                vcard also has a field for birthdate. is it also fascist?

                oblomov@sociale.networkO This user is from outside of this forum
                oblomov@sociale.networkO This user is from outside of this forum
                oblomov@sociale.network
                wrote last edited by
                #64

                @ariadne

                why was the field added?

                (VCARD has a lot of field for PII. Heck's, it's basically just PII> That doesn't mean that systemd should have that same information. They are different tools for different purposes.)

                @omnirabbit

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

                  I saw a wild take where someone said distributions are fascist for using systemd because systemd now uses Claude for code review.

                  okay. fine, I guess.

                  but if we are rejecting dependencies that use AI tooling, where do we go?

                  seriously. where do we go?

                  if the Linux kernel is using AI tools for codegen, then where do we go?

                  FreeBSD? I would put money on it that they use AI tools.

                  OpenBSD? NetBSD? HURD?

                  do we hard fork every dependency that is now tainted? do we even have the resources to do it?

                  FreeBSD and Illumos are the only ones reasonably close in the tech tree and I suspect both use AI tools too, as their development, like Linux, is driven by capital.

                  brib@bribstodon.xyzB This user is from outside of this forum
                  brib@bribstodon.xyzB This user is from outside of this forum
                  brib@bribstodon.xyz
                  wrote last edited by
                  #65

                  @ariadne honestly i don't have the resources to ensure that every part of my stack is untainted and i've slowly made peace with this. I expect software quality to degrade, and I'm keeping that largely to the sphere outside my control, although I do try to keep make a note of projects which are not doing that (https://codeberg.org/brib/slopfree-software-index).

                  But I haven't made peace with working with code which has been slop generated without hefty hazard pay. I used to love the idea of open source as a digital commons and really wanted to contribute to it, but the recent sloppification has really crushed my dreams in this area

                  ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • brib@bribstodon.xyzB brib@bribstodon.xyz

                    @ariadne honestly i don't have the resources to ensure that every part of my stack is untainted and i've slowly made peace with this. I expect software quality to degrade, and I'm keeping that largely to the sphere outside my control, although I do try to keep make a note of projects which are not doing that (https://codeberg.org/brib/slopfree-software-index).

                    But I haven't made peace with working with code which has been slop generated without hefty hazard pay. I used to love the idea of open source as a digital commons and really wanted to contribute to it, but the recent sloppification has really crushed my dreams in this area

                    ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
                    ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
                    ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
                    wrote last edited by
                    #66

                    @brib fwiw, pkgconf does not allow agents to work autonomously in our tree as a matter of policy:

                    Link Preview Image
                    pkgconf/CONTRIBUTING.md at master · pkgconf/pkgconf

                    package compiler and linker metadata toolkit. Contribute to pkgconf/pkgconf development by creating an account on GitHub.

                    favicon

                    GitHub (github.com)

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

                      I saw a wild take where someone said distributions are fascist for using systemd because systemd now uses Claude for code review.

                      okay. fine, I guess.

                      but if we are rejecting dependencies that use AI tooling, where do we go?

                      seriously. where do we go?

                      if the Linux kernel is using AI tools for codegen, then where do we go?

                      FreeBSD? I would put money on it that they use AI tools.

                      OpenBSD? NetBSD? HURD?

                      do we hard fork every dependency that is now tainted? do we even have the resources to do it?

                      FreeBSD and Illumos are the only ones reasonably close in the tech tree and I suspect both use AI tools too, as their development, like Linux, is driven by capital.

                      teftuft@leporid.netT This user is from outside of this forum
                      teftuft@leporid.netT This user is from outside of this forum
                      teftuft@leporid.net
                      wrote last edited by
                      #67

                      @ariadne yeah, its looks like more and more code it going to be tainted or produced by LLMs in some way. It seems unavoidable, so I guess we need more ergonomic tools for safely running untrusted code to protect as much as is possible from its flaws. But, I think even before there were LLMs this was the case. I haven't audited all of the code my computer runs and some is very flawed I'm sure.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

                        @thesamesam @bluca @lanodan i guess to me, it feels unnatural and jarring to argue with a chatbot in a code review.

                        but that is far less harmful than dealing with changesets where the author does not even fucking know what he is submitting and cannot defend his work.

                        *that* is true misery as a maintainer.

                        aronowski@furry.engineerA This user is from outside of this forum
                        aronowski@furry.engineerA This user is from outside of this forum
                        aronowski@furry.engineer
                        wrote last edited by
                        #68

                        @ariadne @thesamesam @bluca @lanodan The end-user should always be responsible for what they deliver, no matter the tools. Then any excuses like "AI wrote it" would not have any rights to defend the user.

                        ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

                          I saw a wild take where someone said distributions are fascist for using systemd because systemd now uses Claude for code review.

                          okay. fine, I guess.

                          but if we are rejecting dependencies that use AI tooling, where do we go?

                          seriously. where do we go?

                          if the Linux kernel is using AI tools for codegen, then where do we go?

                          FreeBSD? I would put money on it that they use AI tools.

                          OpenBSD? NetBSD? HURD?

                          do we hard fork every dependency that is now tainted? do we even have the resources to do it?

                          FreeBSD and Illumos are the only ones reasonably close in the tech tree and I suspect both use AI tools too, as their development, like Linux, is driven by capital.

                          distractions@mastodon.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                          distractions@mastodon.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                          distractions@mastodon.social
                          wrote last edited by
                          #69

                          @ariadne well, as a developer who has been writing linux kernel code since back in about 2001 or so (actually I think it was something alsa/bluetooth related so probably user space at that point, but … I remember digging deep) - I don’t think it’s feasible to continue OSS without making use of gen AI in development.

                          Its like saying we can’t use C, everything has to be ASM.

                          That doesn’t mean developers don’t need to read or understand the code anymore before committing. But a hard ban? Idk.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • aronowski@furry.engineerA aronowski@furry.engineer

                            @ariadne @thesamesam @bluca @lanodan The end-user should always be responsible for what they deliver, no matter the tools. Then any excuses like "AI wrote it" would not have any rights to defend the user.

                            ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
                            ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
                            ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
                            wrote last edited by
                            #70

                            @aronowski @thesamesam @bluca @lanodan yes, that is basically the pkgconf contribution policy in a nutshell.

                            we have taken some steps to tell agentic tools to fuck off though, because i do not want to deal with it

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • omnirabbit@social.treehouse.systemsO omnirabbit@social.treehouse.systems

                              @ariadne it's protestantism but swapping the god from the ethereal one to "reason". if you are bad you are tainted permanently and must stone; if they stopped using AI tools it would also not be enough because they are "tainted".

                              this pattern repeats over and over from people who unlearned one piece but didn't deprogram the religious dogmatic patterns, and you end up here.

                              is Linux foundation funding the destruction of jobs, removing human contributions, destroying the world with debt, any of that? of course not! but it's still dogma.

                              I don't have a good answer to this, just to remind people what the actual goals and actions of orgs are and hope they listen.

                              matt@toot.cafeM This user is from outside of this forum
                              matt@toot.cafeM This user is from outside of this forum
                              matt@toot.cafe
                              wrote last edited by
                              #71

                              @omnirabbit @ariadne I'm not sure. Cory Doctorow had a well-known post a month or so ago where he described a hard anti-LLM stance as "purity culture", and that produced a significant backlash, with people saying that the moral issue in this case was clear enough to justify complete abstinence. But I guess that doesn't necessarily extend to considering non-abstaining dependencies as tainted.

                              matt@toot.cafeM 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • matt@toot.cafeM matt@toot.cafe

                                @omnirabbit @ariadne I'm not sure. Cory Doctorow had a well-known post a month or so ago where he described a hard anti-LLM stance as "purity culture", and that produced a significant backlash, with people saying that the moral issue in this case was clear enough to justify complete abstinence. But I guess that doesn't necessarily extend to considering non-abstaining dependencies as tainted.

                                matt@toot.cafeM This user is from outside of this forum
                                matt@toot.cafeM This user is from outside of this forum
                                matt@toot.cafe
                                wrote last edited by
                                #72

                                @omnirabbit @ariadne Your argument resonates with me, because I grew up immersed in evangelicalism, so I realize that I still need to deprogram the broader religious dogmatic patterns. But then you have people, especialy here on fedi, who are absolutely certain that using LLMs is bad and that the analogy to religious purity is wrong.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • dysfun@social.treehouse.systemsD This user is from outside of this forum
                                  dysfun@social.treehouse.systemsD This user is from outside of this forum
                                  dysfun@social.treehouse.systems
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #73

                                  @ariadne @distractions i feel like the decades we've managed already are worth something.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

                                    I saw a wild take where someone said distributions are fascist for using systemd because systemd now uses Claude for code review.

                                    okay. fine, I guess.

                                    but if we are rejecting dependencies that use AI tooling, where do we go?

                                    seriously. where do we go?

                                    if the Linux kernel is using AI tools for codegen, then where do we go?

                                    FreeBSD? I would put money on it that they use AI tools.

                                    OpenBSD? NetBSD? HURD?

                                    do we hard fork every dependency that is now tainted? do we even have the resources to do it?

                                    FreeBSD and Illumos are the only ones reasonably close in the tech tree and I suspect both use AI tools too, as their development, like Linux, is driven by capital.

                                    kirakira@furry.engineerK This user is from outside of this forum
                                    kirakira@furry.engineerK This user is from outside of this forum
                                    kirakira@furry.engineer
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #74

                                    @ariadne i do wonder what a path away from this (that isn't "everyone agrees that doing that is bad") looks like

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • lproven@social.vivaldi.netL lproven@social.vivaldi.net

                                      @ariadne

                                      > FreeBSD? I would put money on it that they use AI tools.

                                      As of September they were working on a policy -- to ban it.

                                      Link Preview Image
                                      FreeBSD Project isn't ready to let AI commit code just yet

                                      : But it's OK to use it for docs and translations

                                      favicon

                                      (www.theregister.com)

                                      ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #75

                                      @lproven they may not allow agentic development, but i guarantee you there are people using AI tools to develop changesets.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • distractions@mastodon.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                                        distractions@mastodon.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                                        distractions@mastodon.social
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #76

                                        @ariadne well, because the world already has been changed. That’s a historic hard fact. Pretending it hasn’t won’t stop the wheel from turning. Anyone can set up a new project on GitHub (or CodeBerg for that matter) and put anything up there, and if it somehow does the trick, people won’t care how it does. It’s sad, but that’s how things progress.

                                        I believe it more worthwhile to harden our processes **around** and with gAI, not against it. Because the train will roll.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • R relay@relay.mycrowd.ca shared this topic
                                        Reply
                                        • Reply as topic
                                        Log in to reply
                                        • Oldest to Newest
                                        • Newest to Oldest
                                        • Most Votes


                                        • Login

                                        • Login or register to search.
                                        • First post
                                          Last post
                                        0
                                        • Categories
                                        • Recent
                                        • Tags
                                        • Popular
                                        • World
                                        • Users
                                        • Groups