Can someone explain what is going on here?

Yeah unfortunately this is a real issue. I also think it’s an issue that experienced users don’t really want to help newbies, especially those who can’t or won’t do research by themselves. Ideally experienced users would be more helpful, but at the same time that isn’t their job. There are many who learned Linux more or less on their own so it’s understandable they don’t want to help given they didn’t use any help when it was their turn. I think now that the community is growing this might start to change a bit, as the newcomers are more likely to have had help and be willing to help others.

I sometimes try to advocate for using Linux, and I don’t mind giving friends advice from time to time. That being said I don’t want to be stuck answering stupid questions all the time that could have been solved with a google search or a YouTube video. I have my own stuff to worry about both technical and otherwise.

That’s why I think teaching new users how to access resources like man pages, gnu info pages, google, and so on is the correct approach to take. It is empowering having the skills to work through your own issues. That being said I also think it’s important for experienced people to give advice on more complex questions.

What made you think that?

Stainless steel pans are amazing when used for the right purpose. They weigh much less than cast iron, don’t require any maintenance beside cleaning them, and they are pretty much indestructible. If you burn something badly you can use metal scowering pads or any chemical you damn well like (including sodium hydroxide that will melt flesh) to get the thing clean again. They are tolerant to any cooking temperature you would ever use, ever. You can’t overheat one with any appliance a normal kitchen would have. This means you can easily pop one in the oven provided it has a metal handle.

The only issue being they have no non-stick properties to speak of and relatively little thermal mass. This is good in that they don’t need long to heat up, but bad in that it’s not a consistent temperature and you have to know what you are doing with the power control to get the results you want. This means it’s essentially useless for cooking things like steak, and difficult even to cook an omelet without using a lot of butter, ghee, or oil. Things like tomato sauces though? Perfect. The stainless steel could care less about the acidity.

Oppenheimer is a mainstream movie though. It’s not that geeky.

Even if it didn’t improve further there are still uses for LLMs we have today. That’s only one kind of AI as well, the kind that makes all the images and videos is completely separate. That has come on a long way too.

How did you end up with that lack of emotional capacity?

(Jumping from an insult about dietary preferences to an insult about war crimes is not the same magnitude)

The potato joke is a joke about war crimes even if the person telling it doesn’t realize this. They actually responded in kind.

I don’t think this is strictly true. They do tweak parts of the kernel such as the CPU scheduler to deal with new CPU designs that come out which have special scheduling requirements. That’s actually happened quite a bit recently with AMD and Intel both offering CPUs with asymmetric processors with big and little cores, different clock speeds, different cache, sometimes even different instructions on different cores. They also added ReFS not long ago, which may have required some kernel work.

I can understand though if they have few experienced people and way more junior devs. It would probably explain a lot to be honest. A lot of Microsoft stuff is bloated and/or unreliable.

I find it fascinating that with AI people call out even real photos as being fake

The rust guys would have gained a lot more traction by just asking the C guys to keep a bunch of comments up to date detailing the semantics and error checking procedures, and promising to edit their rust API if the C code changes, but I suspect they didn’t ask for that because they know that no guarantees come from a comment and they want to be sure that the rust code works across all the possible scenarios and in rust culture, that is always documented in the type system where it can be enforced.

I could be being daft but I thought this is more or less what the Rust guys were asking for. Tell us the current symantics of the system, and if it changes in future let us know what the new semantics are and we will fix the Rust code accordingly.

I do understand what you mean though about enforcing restrictions on what the C guys can do without breaking the Rust code. I think you run into situations wherever two languages meet. The way most projects handle this is the upstream releases a new version, or a release candidate of a new version with their breaking changes documented and then downstream updates their stuff accordingly when they get time. Obviously this is one project, but I imagine it’s possible for the C guys to update stuff in a pull request and then drop an email in LKML to the Rust guys so they know stuff needs fixing. None of this seems that hard to me.

Ultimately though everything here is Linus decision. Either your in or your out. If Linus says yes to Rust doing whatever then that’s what’s going to happen. Likewise if he says no, then it’s not going to happen that way. Until he weighs in no one can really say how this will end.

Personally though I disagree with the C guys. Safety features are important and should be used where it is practical to do so. Until now C has had the justification that it’s still the fastest language and by a significant margin. Now a somewhat safe language like Rust exists with the same speed and capabilities I don’t think we can afford to continue ignoring safety for the sake of a few bruised egos. If this was a proper industry like aviation safety would always come first, and if that means adopting new technologies and forcing people to adapt. I can understand if C devs have a hard time adapting, I don’t expect it to happen overnight. The expectation though should be they should learn some Rust eventually, even if it’s just enough to know the type signatures and what not that they might break with their changes to C code. Kernel devs are supposed to be some of the smartest computer people out there. If they can’t learn even that small amount of another language then should they really still be kernel developers?

This is false. Anyone who has used these tools for long enough can tell you this is false.

LLMs have been used to write computer code, craft malware, and even semi-independently hack systems with the support of other pieces of software. They can even grade student’s work and give feedback, but it’s unclear how accurate this will be. As someone who actually researches the use of both LLMs and other forms of AI you are severely underestimating their current capabilities, never mind what they can do in the future.

I also don’t know where you came to the conclusion that hardware performance is always an issue, given that LLM model size varies immensely as does the performance requirements. There are LLMs that can run and run well on an average laptop or even smartphone. It honestly makes me think you have never heard of LLaMa models inc. TinyLLaMa or similar projects.

Future LLMs will still only have this capability, but since their models will have been trained on LLM generated garbage their results will quickly diverge from anything even remotely intelligible.

You can filter data you get from the internet to websites archived before LLMs were even invented as a concept. This is trivial to do for some data sets as well. Some data sets used for this training have already been created without LLM output (think about how the first LLM was trained).

Sources:

• https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.06664
• https://doi.org/10.1145/3607505.3607513
• https://medium.com/google-developer-experts/ml-story-mobilellama3-run-llama3-locally-on-mobile-36182fed3889
• https://github.com/jzhang38/TinyLlama
• Both my own personal direct experience and the experience of my research supervisor, with a dash of basic computer systems knowledge

LLMs have legitimate uses today even if they are currently somewhat limited. In the future they will have more legitimate and illegitimate uses. The capabilities of current LLMs are often oversold though, which leads to a lot of this resentment.

Edit: also LLMs very much are AI (specifically ANI) and ML. It’s literally a form of deep learning. It’s not AGI, but nobody with half a brain ever claimed it was.

The problem is that some people like me won’t get that reference and instead think AIs are universally bad. A lot of people already think this way, and it’s hard to know who believes what.

They aren’t asking C devs to write Rust code, which is what the guy being a heckler was claiming. Why don’t they want to right Rust? For exactly the reasons you describe. The thing is though that’s not currently being asked of them, all they actually want is the documentation to create that code themselves.

You really don’t have to explain any of the culture clash to me lol. I’ve written both C/C++ and Rust. My C and C++ coding skills are demonstrably better (or at least used to be, it’s been a while) than my Rust skills. Why? Because of how complex those guardrails are. The difference is I have the self awareness to know that my lack of Rust skills doesn’t mean that the language is bad, or that C is a safe language to use. Rust tutorials could be improved. Perhaps an easier to use language like Zig might be more useful for some people. I feel like it’s a good compromise between safety and ease of use. Rust though is still incredibly progressive for the industry, and will improve systems security, maintainability and reliability going forward if only people would stop getting in the way.

AI at this stage is just a tool. This might change one day, but today is not that day. Blame the user, not the tool.

AI and ML was being used to assist in scientific research long before ChatGPT or StableDiffusion hit the mainstream news cycle. AIs can be used to predict all sorts of outcomes, including ones relevant to climate, weather, even medical treatment. The University I work for even have a funded PhD program looking at using AI algorithms to detect cancer better, I found out because one of my friends is applying for it.

The research I am doing with AI is not quite as important as that, but it could shape the future of both cyber security and education, as I am looking at using for teaching cyber security students about ethical hacking and security. Do people also use LLMs to hack businesses or government organisations and cause mayhem? Quite probably, and they definitely will in the future. That doesn’t mean that the tool itself is bad, just that some people will inevitably abuse it.

Not all of this stuff is run by private businesses either. A lot of work is done by open source devs working on improving publicly available AI and ML models in their spare time. Likewise some of this stuff is publicly funded through universities like mine. There are people way better than me out there using AIs for all sorts of good things including stopping hackers, curing patients, teaching the next generation, or monitoring climate change. Some of them have been doing it for years.

That might be true but it’s not what happened at that specific conference. I beg you watch the clip to see what happened. Also fuck programmers with the attitude you describe. It’s been proven wrong over and over again with so many C memory safety vulnerabilities.

Unfortunately there are a lot of problems created by using C in the kernel, and having all of this done manually. Many kernel vulnerabilities including several severe ones have been due to issues with memory management. Even the whitehouse has spoken on these issues related to C. Rust has been proven to be comparable to C in terms of performance, sometimes even faster. So it doesn’t make a great deal of sense to keep using C for new projects.

That all being said Rust has had its own issues. There was a recent vulnerability in older versions of cargo the Rust package manager for instance. It’s a somewhat new language so obviously teething issues are to be expected, and it might be too soon to use Rust for mission critical systems. It’s also a harder language to learn and understand, so that makes adopting it more difficult especially for very experienced C developers like those who work on the Linux kernel. It might be better to wait and see what other languages like Zig and Carbon manage to do, but those are even newer and will take more time to actually be production ready.

I think the point of redox is more than just rewriting Linux in Rust. Architecturally they are very different. Redox uses the more modern microkernel approach, whereas Linux is a modular monolith. There are advantages and disadvantages to both designs. They are actually polar opposites in fact. The compromise is something called a hybrid kernel which is used by Windows NT.

This isn’t a disagreement. One person is stating something incorrect. You can disagree on opinion, but facts are facts. The person being referred to here isn’t asking others to learn Rust, they are just asking for more information about the already existing C code so that they can write their Rust code to interoperate with it. This misunderstanding is exactly why that developer was getting heckled on stage, and is the reason why now one has left the project. I would appreciate it if you didn’t make a misunderstanding sound like a valid opinion. Enough damage has already been done.