Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

  • Hacker News
  • While I'm not surprised by Linus using AI, I am a bit surprised Linus used Claude and not one of the open weights models. I know he's always been much more pragmatic than Richard but using a fully closed, proprietary system that is actively attempting to lock out the (more) open competition seems to go against his general history and preferences for free software.
  • > The code, the test programs, the review behind the list above and the first draft of this text were done with an LLM coding assistant (Claude Code) under my direction. The measurements were run on my machine.

    (From the empty commit message put at the top of the draft LLM branch: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/lin...)

  • So what would many anti-AI people say, now that critical infrastructure (Linux, OpenSSL, systemd, MariaDB, and so on) is AI-assisted?
  • I looked at the diffs, they are moderately sized and well readable.

    Nothing like the 2k loc people tend to commit with LLMs.

    One can work with commits and MRs like that.

  • I use AI like most software people do nowadays, but I have to admit that I'm a little surprised that Linus is onboard with it. He always felt like one of the last "old school" developers...he wouldn't even touch C++!
  • He could have at least written the commit messages himself. That llm yapping is annoying to read.
  • Didn't Linus say he stopped coding a while ago, or at least coding the kernel, and mainly reviews and manages the codebase now? Whether the code comes from a machine or a human, perhaps it matters little to how he's been working for a while.

    It's interesting that although I guess he reviewed this LLM generated code, the human review found a race condition.

Explore Birbla archives