bgregs

> I think using AI for kernel dev vs AI for CRUD dev is an important distinction.

I completely agree!

> I just can't fathom why people would be pressured to use AI.

I can only speculate, and I obviously don't have any insight into why the mandates and usage targets exist, so I won't comment on that. I absolutely see value in using AI tooling as an additional validation step, but the generative side is what gives me pause. Maybe I've just seen too many cases of irresponsible use, but I'm not fully convinced that using the tools for _writing_ code produces better results.

You were right to callout the distinction, and my apologies if I responded too bluntly. One of your original replies referred to company mandates as "conspiracy theories", which is where my hesitation to engage came from.

Anyway, I think we're largely in agreement regarding your closing paragraph.

Alright, I'll bite this one time, but based on your other responses I'm getting the feeling that you're not interested in points of view that differ from your own.

I am not a kernel developer. That being said, I've been here for a bit and have worked across many different teams. Management communication and direction is not a secret here. It is well known what the expectations are for devs. I was directly told as much during a recent internal interview with a post-silicon team.

If my lack of direct kernel experience somehow negates the messaging and mandates from management that I see every day, then I guess there's not much more I can contribute to this discussion.

I work for a company that contributes significantly to the Linux kernel, along with many other ventures. I can tell you for a fact that we are _heavily_ pressured to use AI tools for everything we do during the day (including writing documents for management review).

Anecdotal, but the only people I've met who are truly excited about AI tooling were the lowest contributers prior to AI tooling becoming prevalent. The senior devs I interact with on a regular basis are largely negative on the trend, both for code quality issues and the burden it puts on them as reviewers. I can personally say that I am entirely burned out from reviewing the crappiest code I've ever seen, all day, every day, with no end in sight. When it takes less time to generate a revision than it does to review it, this is inevitable. Most people I work with have simply lowered their standards for code quality to meet management expectations for code velocity.

> technically my flip phone, a Kyocera Dura, is an android device, but it can't install apps so I'll consider it suitably "dumb"

You can actually still sideload app stores (F-Droid, Aurora, etc.) on the Kyocera Dura. I bought mine specifically so I could still put my company-mandated pager app on it. Turns out I was able to get a physical pager instead, so I never had to go the sideloading route.