LLMs can program, to some extent. But (not having read your linked post) you only focus on its capabilities, not its implications beyond "can it do the task?".
The single vote approach is absolutely awful. Adding nuance is an improvement, but to be honest the whole idea of voting is insane. Imagine doing that to someone talking to you in person. It would be seriously weird at best.
Voting is a bad system and needs to be dug out from the roots and burned.
This argument has, to me, always reeked of naivety. Heroin is a tool, but it has clear ethical implications, and we make attempts as a society to manage those. So is nuclear, and a particularly relevant one, since many leading AI figures have officially and explicitly stated AI is as dangerous as nuclear weapons. There are countless other examples of "tools" that require moral judgement (all of them, really).
I think Linus is being naive, and given his position of power, irresponsible.
And no, AI isn't perfect.
I could write an essay about how much of an understatement, to the point of being wrong, this is. Many, far more capable than me, already have.
This is NOT some kind of "social warrior" project, never has been, and never will be.
No, of course it's not, but he seems to be treating it like ethics and context are for children.
It makes me worried for the Linux project. Not that he's willing to use AI, but that this is how he sees it. This is a learning experience for me.
I'm reminded of this quote that, to be honest I don't really understand, but feels relevant
Our conventional response to all media, namely that it is how they are used that counts, is the numb stance of the technological idiot. For the 'content' of a medium is like the juicy piece of meat carried by the burglar to distract the watchdog of the mind...The effects of technology do not occur at the level of opinions or concepts, but alter sense ratios or patterns of perception steadily and without any resistance.
It's not only LLMs that are problematic. Vision models, for example, present severe mass surveillance problems. Nor are tech bros only involved in LLMs.
You don't justify "Wi-Fi can be used to track your movements". Sure, it seems plausible that radio waves can be used to detect an individual's location, but does anyone have the infrastructure, organization, funds, will, and power, to track the generic "you", the "you" at scale, as implied in the post title?
LLMs can program, to some extent. But (not having read your linked post) you only focus on its capabilities, not its implications beyond "can it do the task?".