In the kernel community we do open source because it results in better technology, not because of religious reasons.

Open source came about because people wanted to learn (and help others learn) and because they wanted to modify software for their own purposes. Even before copyleft came into play, people would share their work to just share what they did with others.

Later, when things got more complex it became useful to take contributions from others and to build collectively. That made copyleft more useful. And these licenses also became a shield against proprietary aggression.

I don't disagree it more often than not results in better software, but that isn't really my primary motivating factor, personally.

I really hate the comparison with compilers and assemblers. They are deterministic whereas LLMs aren't.

AI is a tool, just like other tools we use. And it's clearly a useful one.

It may not have been that "clearly" even just a year ago, but it's no longer in question today.

This is such a massive red flag comment. If anything it's become increasingly clear in the last year how problematic the tech is...

He follows that up by saying people should make the tools help maintainers not harm them, but suggests no means to do so. This is so blasé and hand wavy, especially when he's responding to people complaining about how it's making their jobs harder. "Just use the tools better". Gee, thanks Linus.

Eeew