Neither does the use of an LLM mean you do not understand thoroughly what you submit. He doesn’t give a crap how the code was created, as long as you, the human (I hope), understand what you are submitting and can take accountability for it. You are still responsible for whatever crap comes out of an LLM, the same way that you are responsible for what comes out of the compiler. Doesn’t mean you shouldn’t use compilers or LLMs.
Do they require disclosure of what font the developer used for coding the patch? No one thinks it matters, but no reason not the be transparent, right?
The reason not to require disclosure is because in their opinion it doesn’t matter any more than the font matters. If the person reviewing the code can’t tell it’s AI, and the code stands on its own, then it stands on its own. If they can tell then it doesn’t meet code standards anyway.
A perspective that I don’t disagree with is that “disclosure” can be a shield for the developer to hide behind. “Anything weird wasn’t me being dumb, just the AI being wonky”, and that’s writing an excuse for subpar code. You submitted it, it’s your code, and if you can’t justify some dumb bit in it then you deserve the shame without the help of a face saving “it was the AI”.
Furthermore - I suspect he doesn’t even care if you understand it. He cares if it works reliably. If you accomplish the task of solving hard problems by taking shrooms and dancing naked on your keyboard, I don’t see why he would care.
Neither does the use of an LLM mean you do not understand thoroughly what you submit. He doesn’t give a crap how the code was created, as long as you, the human (I hope), understand what you are submitting and can take accountability for it. You are still responsible for whatever crap comes out of an LLM, the same way that you are responsible for what comes out of the compiler. Doesn’t mean you shouldn’t use compilers or LLMs.
Why not be transparent though?
Do they require disclosure of what font the developer used for coding the patch? No one thinks it matters, but no reason not the be transparent, right?
The reason not to require disclosure is because in their opinion it doesn’t matter any more than the font matters. If the person reviewing the code can’t tell it’s AI, and the code stands on its own, then it stands on its own. If they can tell then it doesn’t meet code standards anyway.
A perspective that I don’t disagree with is that “disclosure” can be a shield for the developer to hide behind. “Anything weird wasn’t me being dumb, just the AI being wonky”, and that’s writing an excuse for subpar code. You submitted it, it’s your code, and if you can’t justify some dumb bit in it then you deserve the shame without the help of a face saving “it was the AI”.
Furthermore - I suspect he doesn’t even care if you understand it. He cares if it works reliably. If you accomplish the task of solving hard problems by taking shrooms and dancing naked on your keyboard, I don’t see why he would care.
It doesn’t work reliably, though. It had a race condition he missed due to LLM-induced brainrot.
Which is a shame considering the Linux distro has never ever once ever ever ever contained a bug