Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AI in Linux

drewdevault.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 106 posts

Re: AI in Linux

#81

Post by NewJazz »

atemerev wrote: post #77
NewJazz wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of people campaign against things like airplanes or golf courses. They might even be the same folks protesting AI usage! Imagine that!

Well thanks, but I prefer to have airplanes, and maybe occasionally even golf courses. As for climate change - you'd need to protest against Chinese (and Western, but mostly Chinese) coal and gas power plants way way before than you protest against airplanes and golf courses. I don't see too many protesters holding signs like "stop Chinese coal plants". For some reason.

Maybe because their ability to influence coal power generation policy in China is much less than their ability to influence it in the US?

Or because Chinese AI has enabled a complete crackdown on dissent?

Hmm, imagine that!

Re: AI in Linux

#82

Post by jamii »

> The AI built-out is by far the fastest growing energy consumer in the world, and they’re being built with fossil fuels, or drawing green energy demand away from replacing the fossil fuels depended on by other industries.

This paragraph links to the IEA report which does indeed call datacenters the fastest growing energy consumer, but also says:

> Despite rapid growth, data centres remain a relatively small part of the overall power system, rising from about 1% of global electricity generation today to 3% in 2030, accounting for less than 1% of total global CO2 emissions.

For scale, beef production is about 9% of total greenhouse gas emission.

Re: AI in Linux

#83

Post by 9x39 »

NewJazz wrote: post #59
9x39 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by... Share of global CO2: China 33% US 12% India 8% Russia 5% Japan 3% History didn't start in the last 12 months.

What's your point?

Your comment strongly implies AI is responsible for 50C temps.

AI is at the top of an industrialization iceberg going back a century, with uneven countries as beneficiaries and externalities.

Re: AI in Linux

#84

Post by mbrumlow »

dminik wrote: post #80
Legend2440 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either we will invent new jobs, as we have always done in the past. Or if truly all jobs can be done by machine, we retire and go live a life of fully automated luxury space communism.

I wish I could share your optimism.

Having jobs for the sake of having jobs sounds like living in hell.

From what I can tell your argument works out to be as simple as we can’t do this because we want to keep people working, which the vast majority of people hate doing.

There is a small minority of people who enjoy work. It seems cruel to enslave a people in mass simply to keep them busy.

Re: AI in Linux

#85

Post by ch71r22 »

throwuxiytayq wrote: post #75
ch71r22 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's disingenuous because it's attacking something that the article didn't say. It didn't say "kernel devs should prompt less because it uses up water." The real argument was that AI has many externalities that should be considered (climate change, water use, energy prices, putting people out of jobs) and that Linux, as a relevant and influential political actor, should engage with these topics. It's not even giving…

> These are thought-terminating cliches; not logical arguments Consider sometimes terminating some thoughts and replacing them with actually useful ones. It’s good for you and your goals regardless of what they are. People burning thought-hours on pretending that we can make AI go away are basically doing nothing except emitting CO2 and consuming water. If you want change, start with yourself! Anyway, so far zero act…

The original discussion was based on actionable suggestions about an opt-out system for Sachiko

Re: AI in Linux

#86

Post by throwuxiytayq »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #33
throwuxiytayq wrote: post #2

tl;dr Kernel devs should prompt less because it uses up water or something. Repeat after me: you can't put the cat back in the bag. Pandora's box is open. Sucks, but you have to learn to live with the reality that most developers will use AI to write code from now on.

> Sucks, but you have to learn to live with the reality that most developers will use AI to write code from now on. No I don't. I can urge them to actually do their jobs and not just turn out slop, while refusing to use the slop machine myself.

Good luck to you, but I hope you’re mentally prepared to face the future where an average software developer increases their use of AI by orders of magnitude.

Re: AI in Linux

#87

Post by atemerev »

NewJazz wrote: post #81
atemerev wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well thanks, but I prefer to have airplanes, and maybe occasionally even golf courses. As for climate change - you'd need to protest against Chinese (and Western, but mostly Chinese) coal and gas power plants way way before than you protest against airplanes and golf courses. I don't see too many protesters holding signs like "stop Chinese coal plants". For some reason.

Maybe because their ability to influence coal power generation policy in China is much less than their ability to influence it in the US? Or because Chinese AI has enabled a complete crackdown on dissent? Hmm, imagine that!

Well I see much less protests against gas and coal powered stations in the US than against, say, nuclear.

Re: AI in Linux

#88

Post by dminik »

mbrumlow wrote: post #84
dminik wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish I could share your optimism.

Having jobs for the sake of having jobs sounds like living in hell. From what I can tell your argument works out to be as simple as we can’t do this because we want to keep people working, which the vast majority of people hate doing. There is a small minority of people who enjoy work. It seems cruel to enslave a people in mass simply to keep them busy.

The current economic system is based on people working in exchange for payment. They can then use it on their own life, including living space, food, health and entertainment. Those who do not work do not get such "luxuries."

I'm not arguing for forcing people to work. If we get to a point where no work is economically feasible for humans to do I would very much like some form of UBI or similar to take care of people.

Speaking of enslaving people, the billionaire class has started speaking of removing peoples right to vote if they do not pay taxes (e.g. if they do not work.)

https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/why-did-154-bil...

I very much wish that people would no longer have to do busy work and that they would have time for family and hobbies, but being the pessimist that I am, I'm not very hopeful we'll get there any time soon.

Re: AI in Linux

#89

Post by [deleted] »

atemerev wrote: post #32
criddell wrote: post #12

From the title, I was hoping this was going to be a story about the major AI distros agreeing on an API and basic AI capabilities to be included in Linux just like Microsoft and Apple have done with their operating systems. Instead, it's: > how many tons of CO₂ added to the atmosphere or liters of fresh water supplies disrupted is a tolerable price for a better code review? The answer isn't zero, is it?

And also it can be zero. Nuclear power is CO2 neutral. So is solar.

[deleted]

Re: AI in Linux

#90

Post by criddell »

ch71r22 wrote: post #16
datakan wrote: post #4

I read through this and must have missed it, but I don't see a single example of AI use in the Linux kernel development posing a problem.

The article isn't trying to find a particular example. It's talking about the overall stance of Linux on AI use. It argues that maintainers should consider political/moral/ethical arguments around climate change, effect on water supplies, energy prices, etc.

> It argues that maintainers should consider political/moral/ethical arguments around climate change, effect on water supplies, energy prices, etc

Is the assumption that maintainers did not consider those things?

Post reply on HN