The title is pure clickbait, but the article is nuanced and reasonably well written, IMO.
No one wants a freaking Ubuntu chatbot on their desktop, but code submission is an entirely different issue, and I think “the submitter is entirely responsible for their code” is a very reasonable position.
And obviously, LLM-generated code policy needs to be tuned to each project and their contributor community. As an example not cited in the article, vibe-coded PRs are an ongoing plague for llama.cpp, an LLM inference engine itself, so they blanket ban them. Ironic, and perfectly reasonable. But Linus researching that Intel bug with a little help, but using his brain for the legwork and actual submission, is also reasonable.
The title is pure clickbait, but the article is nuanced and reasonably well written, IMO.
No one wants a freaking Ubuntu chatbot on their desktop, but code submission is an entirely different issue, and I think “the submitter is entirely responsible for their code” is a very reasonable position.
And obviously, LLM-generated code policy needs to be tuned to each project and their contributor community. As an example not cited in the article, vibe-coded PRs are an ongoing plague for llama.cpp, an LLM inference engine itself, so they blanket ban them. Ironic, and perfectly reasonable. But Linus researching that Intel bug with a little help, but using his brain for the legwork and actual submission, is also reasonable.