Whenever AI is mentioned lots of people in the Linux space immediately react negatively. Creators like TheLinuxExperiment on YouTube always feel the need to add a disclaimer that “some people think AI is problematic” or something along those lines if an AI topic is discussed. I get that AI has many problems but at the same time the potential it has is immense, especially as an assistant on personal computers (just look at what “Apple Intelligence” seems to be capable of.) Gnome and other desktops need to start working on integrating FOSS AI models so that we don’t become obsolete. Using an AI-less desktop may be akin to hand copying books after the printing press revolution. If you think of specific problems it is better to point them out and try think of solutions, not reject the technology as a whole.

TLDR: A lot of ludite sentiments around AI in Linux community.

  • FatCat@lemmy.worldOP
    0·
    2 years ago

    That’s just nitpicking. Everyone here knows what we mean by AI. Yes it refers to LLMs.

    Reminds me of Richard Stallman always interjecting to say “actually its gnu/Linux or as I like to say gnu plus Linux”…

    Well no Mr Stallman its actually gnu + Linux + Wayland + systemd + chromium and whatever other software you have installed, are you happy now??

    • ElectricMachman@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
      0·
      2 years ago

      So when we actually do have AI, what are we supposed to call it? The current use of the term “AI” is too ambiguous to be of any use.

      • HumanPenguin@feddit.ukEnglish
        0·
        2 years ago

        Honestly what we have now is AI. As in it is not intelligent just trys to mimic it.

        Digital Intelegence if we ever achive it would be a more accurate name.

        • FatCat@lemmy.worldOP
          0·
          2 years ago

          This is a bit philosophical but who is to say that mimicking intelligence with advanced math is not intelligence. LLMs can perform various thinking tasks better than humans we consider intelligent.

    • breadsmasher@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      2 years ago

      To be 🤓 really really nitpicky, and i’m writing this because I find it interesting, not an attack or whatever. A tongue in cheek AcHtUaLlY 🤓

      GNU/Linux is the “whole operating system”, and everything else is extra. The usefulness of an operating system without applications is debatable but they 🤓 technically aren’t required to complete the definition of an operating system.

      But this is also basically the debate of Linux vs GNU/Linux vs also needing applications to make a useful operating system.

      Quoting wiki summary,

      In its original meaning, and one still common in hardware engineering, the operating system is a basic set of functions to control the hardware and manage things like task scheduling and system calls. In modern terminology used by software developers, the collection of these functions is usually referred to as a kernel, while an ‘operating system’ is expected to have a more extensive set of programmes. The GNU project maintains two kernels itself, allowing the creation of pure GNU operating systems, but the GNU toolchain is also used with non-GNU kernels. Due to the two different definitions of the term ‘operating system’, there is an ongoing debate concerning the naming of distributions of GNU packages with a non-GNU kernel.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU?wprov=sfti1#GNU_as_an_operating_system

      • FatCat@lemmy.worldOP
        0·
        2 years ago

        Don’t tell me Linux mint would still be Linux mint without the a desktop environment like Cinnamon. An os is the collection of all the software not just the low level code.

    • Inevitable Waffles [Ohio]@midwest.socialEnglish
      0·
      2 years ago

      As someone who frequently interacts with the tech illiterate, no they don’t. This sudden rush to put weighed text hallucination tables into everything isn’t that helpful. The hype feels like self driving cars or 3D TVs for those of us old enough to remember that. The potential for damage is much higher than either of those two preceding fads and cars actually killed poeple. I think many of us are expressing a healthy level of skepticism toward the people who need to sell us the next big thing and it is absolutely warranted.

      • FatCat@lemmy.worldOP
        0·
        2 years ago

        The potential for damage is much higher

        Doubt it. Maybe Microsoft can fuck it up somehow but the tech is here to stay and will do massive good.