I really appreciated your explanation; it was clear and I think you’re correct. It’s disappointing that Linus is either unaware of it or doesn’t care about deterministic results.

Is that what Linus is talking about in the OP? I was sure this was about code-generation. If he’s talking about images and recording the metadata then I agree with you.

You make a good point about capability. However, I’m trying to say that in practical capability, I do know exactly what compiler flags were enabled (it’s whatever the Makefile passed, which is whatever configure determined, the whole thing is checked in as source code), but the exact model+seed isn’t being recorded for this Linux changes.

To make the compiler analogy, we should be saving model, seed, prompt, etc and then the LLM output becomes the equivalent of the compiled code. I think that’s an extremely defensible argument, while “bet you can’t write assembly!” is not.

I’m kind of gobsmacked by this. I’ve heard younger developers compare LLM with compiler and chalked it up to ignorance, but I don’t get what this is.

Can I write code in assembly? Yes. Of course. It’s true that I never do it, but if there was a rule that you needed to write some assembly now and then to certify as a kernel developer I don’t see how it would be any kind of impediment.

Comparing more directly: if you hand me a compiled binary and the source code and ask “why is the bit at address 0xXXXXXXXXX a 0?” I can, with 100% certainty, answer that. Probably in less than a day of effort. If I ask "why did the LLM output “for” as the XXXXth word of its utterance, can Linus say why?

And “can you write a good commit message without an editor?” Uhhh? At least when I was in school, this was something people did for fun/messing around. I still do cat > somefile when I need to put some quick text together. In fact, Claude will sometimes write a Git commit by cat-ing into a file–which it’s doing because there’s so many online examples of this. Fucking weird things for Linus to pick. Makes me think his brain’s rotted.

Here’s a starting-point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_language_model

Endless Sky is excellent. It captures all the enjoyment of the EV games, and its free for everyone.

Your controller looks great. Just the kind of thing an independent ES pilot would be flying with!

Who wrote these regex? They are terrible:

• We’ve got a capture-group for the numbers (the () means we’re saving that part for later). Are we planning to do something with the mlg numbers? Why don’t we care about the mmmberry numbers?
• The capture is one or more numbers, but then it’s an optional group. Write ([0-9]*) instead
• We match mlg and mlg1 but not mlga because we anchor to the end ($). But not on mmmberry–that one will match “mmmberry5” (but we don’t track the number!) but also “mmmberry_is_the_worst” so the enemy of my enemy is also my enemy because they share a prefix

Maybe mlg has sock-puppet accounts mlg1, mlg2, but never MLG?

Hatred Enterprise Linux being marketed to the US gov

“Why would anyone in Europe care?”

I think the point of it would be to signal to Trump that Europe is his vassal. Trump says it’s sad that this guy is dead, therefore Europe is sad. Doesn’t really matter who it is or what’s up. You’re just following the pledge of fealty.

So, I think it’s good that the EU decided they’re sovereign for now. This sort of thing is always an ongoing project.