r/linux • u/MMORPGDev • 20h ago

Development Linux Kernel Developers Plan To Remove "Assisted-By" Tag Requirement For AI/LLM Usage

https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-Dropping-Assisted-By-Req
517 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

376 comments sorted by

View all comments

69

u/RamaAnthony 18h ago

The entire usage of AI/LLM (even for coding) and normalization of its business model within Linux ecosystem (by using it and even removing disclosure tags) seems to be anti-thethical to FOSS principles but what do I know.

9

u/Zaphoidx 17h ago

How?

47

u/foolish_shrimp 16h ago

Firstly AI is built from copyright theft, FOSS is generally very avoidant of copyright theft, the idea is generally to allow people to decide what something they created is used for.

Secondly, the end goal for AI companies is to sit between you and everything you need to do, like uber do with taxis or door dash with deliveries, but for every single interaction you have with the outside world. The subscription fee and user penetration these companies are aiming for, it's genuinely horrifying. We should not be indirectly supporting a world where you pay openAI $2000+ a month to live in a frictionless AI vacuum.

-11

u/Apprehensive_Lake698 16h ago

Let me ask this: yes it’s based on copyright theft. And in principle I agree it should be bad. 

But, there is no reasonable way to adequately compensate every single author of text on the planet correctly for their contribution and effect on the datasets. And without pooling all of human output, we would not be able to create these tools, which are net capability benefits for humanity.

At what point is it not just unreasonable to block progress for however many decades of our lives while the bean counters figure out how many cents every human on earth is owed?

The obsession comes from not wanted it to be profited off of. But who’s to say Anthropic and OpenAI will even be the winners, and not open models whose paths could only have been reasonably blazed by these labs that have insane investment?

I just don’t think it’s worth getting so upset about. I’m sure plenty of the C++ I’ve written is in a dataset somewhere. If it means that the next Opus will write slightly better C++ for me, then I don’t give a fuck.

3

u/ngoonee 16h ago

"net capability benefits" is a loaded sentence. Open source has already been pooling human output for decades, but it is clearly slower. The quest for speed is primarily driven by cost considerations, or competition considerations, neither of which have a place within open source ethos (nor, ideally, a humane world where the economy is not built on competing with others to grab more). That's not the world we live in now, and LLM coding is getting us further away from that world.

1

u/Apprehensive_Lake698 16h ago

Open Source is not benefitted from the ability to write code faster? Am I getting that right? You think that there is no value in being able to create open source versions of significantly more complex software within our lifetimes?

You’re living in false glory days in your head. I want real world effects, not feel good stories about the buds against the world. 

0

u/ngoonee 15h ago

With real open source software, the code is open for everyone to contribute to, review, and use. It's a community effort. And has created incredibly complex and stable software that runs the modern world.

Being able to write worse software faster is NOT valuable to humanity. Some individuals may gain financial benefit for a while, but the net effect in overwhelming reviewers and declining code quality due to that will harm all of us. Speed at all costs will inevitably break things, and that's what AI currently is offering.

If some theoretical future version of LLMs becomes capable of actual reasoning about code without costing enough energy to power all the world's aircraft carriers then maybe there'll be a net benefit. The current code-firehose approach is not it.

3

u/binaryfireball 16h ago

You don't do it. It's really simple.

-4

u/Apprehensive_Lake698 16h ago

Surprisingly it’s now r/linux that thinks blocking technological process so that lawyers can get you 30 cents in a decade for compensation is a good thing. What a world

5

u/binaryfireball 16h ago

This isn't tech progress, it's a hostile corporate takeover.

1

u/Apprehensive_Lake698 16h ago

The hardware running local LLMs in my homelab begs to differ

2

u/binaryfireball 15h ago

Hardware cant beg to be differ

1

u/Apprehensive_Lake698 15h ago

If you’re ‘uhm ackshully’ing my normal turns of phrase then I really know you’re just throwing a tantrum lol

2

u/binaryfireball 15h ago

You're missing the forest

→ More replies (0)

1

u/jacobgkau 15h ago

Did you actually develop these "local LLMs" from scratch, or were they trained and released by AI corporations? Because if it's the latter, I don't see how running them in your homelab makes it "not a corporate takeover" any more than running Windows on your own hardware means you're not losing control over your computer when you do that.

2

u/Apprehensive_Lake698 15h ago

Go ahead, let me know what nefarious things these LLMs are depriving me of running on my own private network. What sort of corporate grip is held over me? Comparing them to running software like Windows is hilarious.

Is this subreddit really plagued by non-technical people? 

2

u/jacobgkau 15h ago

Comparing running proprietary software (an LLM you don't have the source code for and cannot modify/recompile) with running proprietary software (Windows, which you don't have the source code for and cannot modify/recompile) makes me non-technical?

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/ozone6587 16h ago edited 16h ago

Or you do because you're not an ignorant troglodyte. You do because you're not against human progress and scientific advancement. You do because there are zero moral issues with training on public data, just as there are none when a human does the same.

4

u/binaryfireball 16h ago

"because there is 0 moral issues" ... You could at least learn the basics of the language if you're going to start calling people troglodytes.

1

u/ozone6587 16h ago

I would also focus on a minor spelling mistake if I were in your shoes. Everything else is impossible to argue against.

-1

u/binaryfireball 16h ago

Spelling??? Hahahahahha

0

u/RancidVagYogurt1776 15h ago

"Public data" is a really odd way to describe the massive amount of private data and pirated content used to train these models lol

0

u/ozone6587 15h ago

Reading the contents of published books does not count as "private data".

0

u/RancidVagYogurt1776 14h ago

Is this AI psychosis?

Ask your AI to explain to you what the word "and" means. I very specifically said private data AND pirated content.

0

u/ozone6587 14h ago

If they didn't pirate data you would be OK with the training? What is your problem?

Other than piracy, training models is moral AND legal.

1

u/RancidVagYogurt1776 14h ago

Something can be legal and immoral.

The crux of the immoral argument is that massive amounts of theft went into training the models both through piracy and just straight up ripping off artists.

→ More replies (0)