“别犯蠢了，”Linus怒怼“AI垃圾代码”争论：靠写文档，根本救不了Linux内核

Core Viewpoint - The Linux kernel community is debating whether to establish a specific submission guideline for "tool-generated code," particularly concerning AI programming assistants and LLM-generated patches, amid concerns about the influx of low-quality "AI-generated patches" known as AI Slop [1][3]. Group 1: Linus Torvalds' Position - Linus Torvalds emphasizes that documentation should focus on the tools themselves rather than targeting AI directly, as AI-assisted submissions will persist regardless of documentation [1][3]. - He criticizes the notion that AI-generated code can be effectively labeled or regulated through documentation, stating that those submitting low-quality AI code are unlikely to mark it as such [3][5]. - Torvalds dismisses the idea that documentation can solve the issue of AI-generated garbage code, labeling such discussions as naive and ineffective [3][5]. Group 2: Community Perspectives - There are two extreme viewpoints within the community: one side believes AI will destroy software engineering, while the other sees it as a revolutionary force for automation [5]. - Torvalds maintains a neutral stance, insisting that the only appropriate characterization of AI in documentation is as a tool, avoiding any divisive rhetoric [5][6]. - The debate reflects a broader anxiety within the Linux community about the future of development practices and the role of AI, rather than merely a technical specification issue [5][6]. Group 3: Governance and Code Quality - Torvalds argues that rules can only constrain those who are already compliant, and those who wish to submit low-quality patches will ignore any guidelines, regardless of their length [4][5]. - He asserts that the real focus should be on code review mechanisms, the judgment of maintainers, and the community culture, which cannot be automated or regulated through documentation [6].