Post #3883776

2026-07-16 09:27 UTC

@doctormo@floss.social it’s pathetic the register too ignores the reasons to why many people have objections to llm (ai is marketing not a technology) starting with the massive theft it’s based on and the exploitations of data workers. The objection is not for llm as “tool”. This industry that produces them is deeply immoral and corrupt if not fascist.

Replies (1)

@zer0unplanned@friendica.rogueproject.org 2026-07-16 13:08

@oatmeal@kolektiva.social @doctormo@floss.social Your concerns about the AI industry's ethics data scraping, labor exploitation, and corporate overreach, yo that's valid and widely shared, but they do not justify banning AI tools within the Linux kernel project. Linus Torvalds is right because the kernel’s policy explicitly separates tool usage from industry practices: it mandates human accountability for every line of code (via the Assisted-by tag and DCO sign-off) while refusing to let external moral disputes over AI training data dictate internal engineering workflows. The solution to unethical AI practices is to demand regulatory reform and support ethical AI alternatives, not to handicap kernel developers by banning tools that improve security and productivity. Open source has always thrived by adopting useful technology while maintaining strict human oversight; abandoning that pragmatism would harm the project without fixing the broader industry’s problems.

Open ##3883775