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.
  • colinstu@birdbutt.comC colinstu@birdbutt.com

    @ariadne what makes (current) hobbyist stuff like REDOX OS just that more exciting.

    With such a strong/rigid take, yeah I don’t know where they’d expect folks to immediately move to.

    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
    #33

    @colinstu but that's the thing. redox is not a project that we can shift our production computing to immediately.

    colinstu@birdbutt.comC 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT thesamesam@social.treehouse.systems

      @lanodan @ariadne re Hurd: I only saw one person doing some LLM review (not of submitted patches but they took it upon themselves to submit its findings), I don't consider that tainted and I don't think it's some sort of official effort or anything, even if I don't like it.

      systemd embracing it with a CLAUDE.md, using it in all PRs, commits co-authored-by it etc is different.

      lanodan@queer.hacktivis.meL This user is from outside of this forum
      lanodan@queer.hacktivis.meL This user is from outside of this forum
      lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
      wrote last edited by
      #34
      @thesamesam @ariadne Ah so not yet tainted, but still meh social wise that I guess could be addressed via policy/guidelines.
      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT thesamesam@social.treehouse.systems

        @bluca @lanodan @ariadne Someone deciding to send ML output a handful of times an ML is different from it being an established part of the project, sure.

        (I also didn't say "perfectly ok", it's just that it's clearly different, even if one does or doesn't like it?)

        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
        #35

        @thesamesam @lanodan @ariadne gotcha, rules for thee but not for me

        thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • bluca@fosstodon.orgB bluca@fosstodon.org

          @thesamesam @lanodan @ariadne gotcha, rules for thee but not for me

          thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT This user is from outside of this forum
          thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT This user is from outside of this forum
          thesamesam@social.treehouse.systems
          wrote last edited by
          #36

          @bluca @lanodan @ariadne If a contributor had copilot review their PR for systemd but systemd didn't have it as part of CI or as some regular part of contribution, I'd say the same thing.

          But I'm not even making rules! I'm pointing out a distinction?

          ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA bluca@fosstodon.orgB 2 Replies Last reply
          0
          • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

            i guess my point here is that reactionary behavior does not really benefit anyone and just leads to bad decisions

            omnirabbit@social.treehouse.systemsO This user is from outside of this forum
            omnirabbit@social.treehouse.systemsO This user is from outside of this forum
            omnirabbit@social.treehouse.systems
            wrote last edited by
            #37

            @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.

            omnirabbit@social.treehouse.systemsO matt@toot.cafeM 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

              @colinstu but that's the thing. redox is not a project that we can shift our production computing to immediately.

              colinstu@birdbutt.comC This user is from outside of this forum
              colinstu@birdbutt.comC This user is from outside of this forum
              colinstu@birdbutt.com
              wrote last edited by
              #38

              @ariadne indeed it’s not. Yeah the argument right now (to move asap) is just a nonstarter. It’s gong to take time (if ever) to de-AI codebases and projects. There isn’t going to be any simple fix or solution to it 😕

              For those who hold onto this, what do they use currently? They actually reap what they sow?

              ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA 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.

                omnirabbit@social.treehouse.systemsO This user is from outside of this forum
                omnirabbit@social.treehouse.systemsO This user is from outside of this forum
                omnirabbit@social.treehouse.systems
                wrote last edited by
                #39

                @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.

                omnirabbit@social.treehouse.systemsO oblomov@sociale.networkO 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • colinstu@birdbutt.comC colinstu@birdbutt.com

                  @ariadne indeed it’s not. Yeah the argument right now (to move asap) is just a nonstarter. It’s gong to take time (if ever) to de-AI codebases and projects. There isn’t going to be any simple fix or solution to it 😕

                  For those who hold onto this, what do they use currently? They actually reap what they sow?

                  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
                  #40

                  @colinstu at least in my case, every time i've embraced LLM technology, i've come to regret it basically immediately.

                  case in point: grammarly copyediting feature

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT thesamesam@social.treehouse.systems

                    @bluca @lanodan @ariadne If a contributor had copilot review their PR for systemd but systemd didn't have it as part of CI or as some regular part of contribution, I'd say the same thing.

                    But I'm not even making rules! I'm pointing out a distinction?

                    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
                    #41

                    @thesamesam @bluca @lanodan personally, i don't even think i *care* about LLM-based reviews.

                    what i care about is LLM-based code generation because every time i've interacted with people using those tools to produce changesets, it's been fucking miserable

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

                      @thesamesam @bluca @lanodan personally, i don't even think i *care* about LLM-based reviews.

                      what i care about is LLM-based code generation because every time i've interacted with people using those tools to produce changesets, it's been fucking miserable

                      thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT This user is from outside of this forum
                      thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT This user is from outside of this forum
                      thesamesam@social.treehouse.systems
                      wrote last edited by
                      #42

                      @ariadne @bluca @lanodan I've sort of come to this position as well, especially sympathising w/ what Lennart says about Bad Guys already using LLMs to find vulnerabilities, so may as well try to leverage them to do some good.

                      Don't love it still but I definitely feel warmer to it than the rest.

                      ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA lanodan@queer.hacktivis.meL 2 Replies Last reply
                      0
                      • thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT thesamesam@social.treehouse.systems

                        @ariadne @bluca @lanodan I've sort of come to this position as well, especially sympathising w/ what Lennart says about Bad Guys already using LLMs to find vulnerabilities, so may as well try to leverage them to do some good.

                        Don't love it still but I definitely feel warmer to it than the rest.

                        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
                        #43

                        @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.

                        ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA aronowski@furry.engineerA 2 Replies Last reply
                        0
                        • thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT thesamesam@social.treehouse.systems

                          @bluca @lanodan @ariadne If a contributor had copilot review their PR for systemd but systemd didn't have it as part of CI or as some regular part of contribution, I'd say the same thing.

                          But I'm not even making rules! I'm pointing out a distinction?

                          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
                          #44

                          @thesamesam @lanodan @ariadne and I'm pointing out that the distinction is specious and a glaring case of double standards. Everyone uses who uses these tools does so in different ways, and you don't get to do moral grandstanding just because you arbitrarily drew a line in the sand where it's most convenient for you, and not a millimeter further. Doesn't work that way, sorry

                          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.

                            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
                            #45

                            @thesamesam @bluca @lanodan basically the problem is AI as force multiplier for charlatanism.

                            claude making it miserable for charlatans to get their PRs merged actually seems like a positive use of the technology...

                            bluca@fosstodon.orgB 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT thesamesam@social.treehouse.systems

                              @ariadne @bluca @lanodan I've sort of come to this position as well, especially sympathising w/ what Lennart says about Bad Guys already using LLMs to find vulnerabilities, so may as well try to leverage them to do some good.

                              Don't love it still but I definitely feel warmer to it than the rest.

                              lanodan@queer.hacktivis.meL This user is from outside of this forum
                              lanodan@queer.hacktivis.meL This user is from outside of this forum
                              lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
                              wrote last edited by
                              #46
                              @thesamesam @ariadne @bluca Kind of still feels bad given how overblown a lot of security vulnerabilities are (I guess ICANN and registries will get more money from website-logo vulns), plus imagine getting a big wave of low-impact security vulnerabilities.

                              But well that's roughly the same issues as with fuzzers, except it's combined with codegen this time.
                              thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • lanodan@queer.hacktivis.meL lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
                                @thesamesam @ariadne @bluca Kind of still feels bad given how overblown a lot of security vulnerabilities are (I guess ICANN and registries will get more money from website-logo vulns), plus imagine getting a big wave of low-impact security vulnerabilities.

                                But well that's roughly the same issues as with fuzzers, except it's combined with codegen this time.
                                thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT This user is from outside of this forum
                                thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT This user is from outside of this forum
                                thesamesam@social.treehouse.systems
                                wrote last edited by
                                #47

                                @lanodan @bluca @ariadne Yes, exactly, it really is fuzzers all over again, just the problem is you now have this script-kiddy enabling tech on top.

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

                                  @lanodan @bluca @ariadne Yes, exactly, it really is fuzzers all over again, just the problem is you now have this script-kiddy enabling tech on top.

                                  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
                                  #48

                                  @thesamesam @lanodan @bluca yes, but script kiddies also figured out how to use the fuzzers and submit slop to us with "can you tell me about your bug bounty program?"

                                  thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT lanodan@queer.hacktivis.meL 2 Replies Last reply
                                  0
                                  • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

                                    @thesamesam @bluca @lanodan basically the problem is AI as force multiplier for charlatanism.

                                    claude making it miserable for charlatans to get their PRs merged actually seems like a positive use of the technology...

                                    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
                                    #49

                                    @ariadne @thesamesam @lanodan of course and stuff like that gets shot into the sun with a rocket without mercy.

                                    But you don't argue with chatbots in reviews - these days claudebot is about 90% signal-to-noise ratio. The 10% noise you just dismiss, there's no arguing involved. But that 90% of signal has got really good in the past ~3 months, and there's no point denying it. This stuff was mostly crap until end of last year, but things change, and there's nothing wrong with changing views

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

                                      @thesamesam @lanodan @bluca yes, but script kiddies also figured out how to use the fuzzers and submit slop to us with "can you tell me about your bug bounty program?"

                                      thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT This user is from outside of this forum
                                      thesamesam@social.treehouse.systemsT This user is from outside of this forum
                                      thesamesam@social.treehouse.systems
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #50

                                      @ariadne @lanodan @bluca yeah, and even before fuzzers with any sort of security tooling actually ("hello your CSP policy is missing on ur static website")

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

                                        @thesamesam @lanodan @bluca yes, but script kiddies also figured out how to use the fuzzers and submit slop to us with "can you tell me about your bug bounty program?"

                                        lanodan@queer.hacktivis.meL This user is from outside of this forum
                                        lanodan@queer.hacktivis.meL This user is from outside of this forum
                                        lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #51
                                        @ariadne @thesamesam @bluca I think it's the kind of thing where I could end up replying "Here's my hourly rate for support requests"
                                        bluca@fosstodon.orgB 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.

                                          dalias@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                                          dalias@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                                          dalias@hachyderm.io
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #52

                                          @ariadne Unfortunately we need (costly! 🤬) deep analysis of how deep the rot goes.

                                          A good approach is multi-faceted:

                                          - Avoiding introduction of new deps with LLM slop in them
                                          - Holding back packages that are adopting slop when the existing package was essentially "done" and didn't need any heavy maintenance.
                                          - Forking packages that are critical and where the LLM slop being introduced is threatening to create serious vulns or regressions.
                                          - Watching closely in packages where the level of slop is contained so far.

                                          The stuff in Linux (kernel) is 🤮 but probably not show-stopping for now, and not easily replaceable or pinnable. But other things can be,

                                          dalias@hachyderm.ioD 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          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