Commit 92bad2eb33
Verified · cmc
Layout: unified · split
content/blog/2026-07-16-re-torvalds-on-ai.org added +88
| @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@ | |||
| 1 | #+date: [2026-07-16 Thu 12:37:35] | ||
| 2 | #+title: Re: Quoting Linus Torvalds | ||
| 3 | #+description: Discussing Linus Torvalds' thoughts on the use of AI in the Linux kernel community. | ||
| 4 | #+slug: re-torvalds-on-ai | ||
| 5 | #+filetags: :linux:ai: | ||
| 6 | |||
| 7 | * Linus on AI | ||
| 8 | |||
| 9 | Linus Torvalds' recent defense of AI in the Linux kernel sparked the predictable | ||
| 10 | backlash, but the real debate is far more nuanced than that. | ||
| 11 | |||
| 12 | This specific blog post is in response to [[https://simonwillison.net/search/?q=linus+torvalds&type=quotation&type_label=Quotation&sort=date][Simon Willison's]] post of the quotation | ||
| 13 | below on his website. | ||
| 14 | |||
| 15 | As Linus says in his message: | ||
| 16 | |||
| 17 | #+begin_quote | ||
| 18 | I realize that some people really dislike AI, but this is an area where I'm | ||
| 19 | willing to absolutely put my foot down as the top-level maintainer. | ||
| 20 | |||
| 21 | Linux is not one of those anti-AI projects, and if somebody has issues with | ||
| 22 | that, they can do the open-source thing and fork it. | ||
| 23 | |||
| 24 | Or just walk away. | ||
| 25 | |||
| 26 | AI is a tool, just like other tools we use. And it's clearly a useful one. | ||
| 27 | |||
| 28 | It may not have been that "clearly" even just a year ago, but it's no longer in | ||
| 29 | question today. | ||
| 30 | |||
| 31 | There are other questions around AI (like what the economy of it will actually | ||
| 32 | look like in the end), but "is it useful" is no longer one of those questions. | ||
| 33 | Anybody who doubts that clearly hasn't actually used it. | ||
| 34 | |||
| 35 | — Linus Torvalds, [[https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/CAHk-=wi4zC+Ze8e+p3tMv8TtG_80KzsZ1syL9anBtmEh5Z40vg@mail.gmail.com/][Linux Media Mailing List]] | ||
| 36 | #+end_quote | ||
| 37 | |||
| 38 | * My Thoughts | ||
| 39 | |||
| 40 | ...and I agree. I do understand some of the push-back from others - such as [[https://lobste.rs/s/pb6d8m/linus_torvalds_on_llm_usage_kernel][the | ||
| 41 | commenters on lobste.rs]]. | ||
| 42 | |||
| 43 | However, online communities tend to drift into the extremes and hard-line their | ||
| 44 | opinions without considering broader context. | ||
| 45 | |||
| 46 | Linus is right that AI is a tool and a very useful one. The commenters are right | ||
| 47 | that there are additional considerations, such as environmental concerns and | ||
| 48 | social/cultural impacts, that we need to consider as we approach the usage of AI | ||
| 49 | tools. But "AI is bad and should be banned" is neither an answer to those | ||
| 50 | questions nor is it an informative take on the collective AI options out there, | ||
| 51 | beside the top AI offerings. | ||
| 52 | |||
| 53 | This push-back often conflates different issues and muddies the waters of the | ||
| 54 | argument: environmental cost/impact, job displacement, corporate capture of | ||
| 55 | open-source labor, and code quality. These are all valid concerns and absolutely | ||
| 56 | deserve attention. But the solution isn't to bury our head in the sand and avoid | ||
| 57 | it. The solution is a logical review of the options and clarifying your stance | ||
| 58 | as a maintainer - write up clear contribution guidelines and code review | ||
| 59 | standards. These steps work regardless of your stance on AI as a maintainer. | ||
| 60 | |||
| 61 | The bottom line here is that AI tools exist and will not be going away. | ||
| 62 | Developers will approach our projects with these tools, not to mention attackers | ||
| 63 | or hackers looking to exploit open-source projects. | ||
| 64 | |||
| 65 | The goal, then, is to level the playing field. How can we enable open-source | ||
| 66 | project maintainers to effectively and efficiently maintain their projects while | ||
| 67 | protecting both their sanity and users? | ||
| 68 | |||
| 69 | Each project may approach this differently, depending on their individual values | ||
| 70 | and concerns, but it's silly to dismiss AI outright without discussion. If a | ||
| 71 | project's set of maintainers or community decides to ban AI, that's their right. | ||
| 72 | But if a maintainer chooses to allow AI in some or all cases, that's also their | ||
| 73 | choice. | ||
| 74 | |||
| 75 | The reality is simple: maintainers set the rules for their projects. Some will | ||
| 76 | embrace AI and some will outright refuse, and we should respect the rules on the | ||
| 77 | projects we contribute to. The Linux kernel's openness to it doesn't obligate | ||
| 78 | anyone else to accept AI. Linux is saying we get to choose when working on the | ||
| 79 | kernel and that's worth defending. Personally, I appreciate that he's willing to | ||
| 80 | take a stance one way or the other, rather than avoid making a statement just to | ||
| 81 | avoid the conflict. | ||
| 82 | |||
| 83 | Lastly, I know some have noted Linus's (often brusque tone) again regarding his | ||
| 84 | "fork it or walk away" point. I'll be honest, I agree with him wholeheartedly | ||
| 85 | here. That's the whole point of open-source. You don't have to use AI to work on | ||
| 86 | the kernel and if you have a strict rule against being involved with projects | ||
| 87 | that involve AI, fork it and maintain a non-AI version. Build a community around | ||
| 88 | it if your feelings are popular with others. | ||