The problem is that AI is not useless. It has a lot of other issues, but not that it is never a helpful tool.
this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2026
67 points (74.5% liked)
Programmer Humor
30720 readers
3006 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
With constrained data sets it’s actually really useful.
Parsing text and logs and correlating events, super useful.
When you dump all human “intelligence” into it you discover how dumb we are collectively.
It's great to explore a new codebase for example.
From the project’s README:
Also note that the python visualizer tool has been basically written by vibe-coding. I know more about analog filters -- and that's not saying much -- than I do about python. It started out as my typical "google and do the monkey-see-monkey-do" kind of programming, but then I cut out the middle-man -- me -- and just used Google Antigravity to do the audio sample visualizer.
This is the commit: https://github.com/torvalds/AudioNoise/commit/93a72563cba609a414297b558cb46ddd3ce9d6b5
Tbf it's his project so he can do whatever he wants
Issue is when people do things like that one dude who had Claude implement support for DWARF in... Whatever language it was (Something MLy I think?) and literally didn't even remove the copyright attribution to some random 3rd person that Claude added. It was a PR of several thousand lines, all AI generated and he had no idea how it worked, but said it's ok, Claude understands it. He didn't even tell anyone he was going to be working on it so there was no discussion of the architecture beforehand.
Edit: Ocaml. So I was right that it was something MLy lol
Claude understands it
Only the words of it tho.
Only the probability of the next token after tokenisation of it.
Not even that.
Quick, let's all abandon Linux (edit: and git) because the main developer did something we don't like! /s
I would say hans reiser enters the room... But he didn't...
Just in case it slipped your eyes when you saw "Torvalds": this is not about the Linux kernel.
If 1) you're smart or practised enough to be able to generate what you're asking the AI to do for yourself, 2) you're able to take what the AI generates and debug, check and correct it using non-AI tools like your own brain, 3) you're sure this whole AI-inclusive process will save time and money, and 4) you're sure using AI as a crutch won't cause you brain-rot in the long term, go nuts.
Caveat: Those last two are tricky traps. You can be sure and wrong.
Otherwise, grab the documentation or a bunch of examples and start hacking and crafting. Leave the AI alone. Maybe ask it a question about something that isn't clear, but on no account trust it. It might have developed the same confusion that you have for precisely the same reasons.
So anyway, Linus clearly fits 1 and 2, and believes 3 and 4 or else he wouldn't be using an AI. Let's just hope he hasn't fallen into the traps.
As I understand it, he doesn't actually know how to do it himself in python. It also seems like a little side project he's bullshitting together anyways, so I guess it's a nice testing ground for trying what it can do. I don't really see Linus investing a lot of time into learning python.
He's also made it very clear that he doesn't want AI slop in the Linux kernel, which is what I'd be more concerned about.
Edit: The project is an attempt to learn about digital audio processing. The visualiser part, not the actual logic, was hacked together from the outset, probably because he's more interested in the actual processing.
These are -- like the analog circuits that started my journey -- toy effects that you shouldn't take seriously. The main design goal has been to learn about digital audio processing basics. Exactly like the guitar pedal was about learning about the hardware side.
From the README of his project, emphasis mine.
He did not make clear he doesn't want AI slop in the kernel, but he always made clear he'll rather kill you rather than pull your slop into the kernel. I believe he said he doesn't care too much whether programmers will use AI to contribute to the kernel because he assumes that will undoubtedly happen. Code shall be pulled into the kernel evaluating the quality of the code itself rather than the coding process.
AI can be a useful tool.
Looks like he's just toying around with it in some project. Why would he take other's words for it when he can just test it himself? Try it out, see what happens, draw conclusions.
There's a lot of mindless hype and a lot of mindless hate around these tools. Makes sense to try these tools and form your own opinion
Didn't he daily a M series macbook when they came out?
I don't remember people being obnoxious about that