This headline is totally misleading. If you actually read what Torvalds says, he says he isn't really a kernel coder anymore, he simply aggregates the work of others. And his use of AI, at least from what he's saying now, is for personal "toy" projects.
He certainly feels that AI is a useful tool, at least for his purposes, but nowhere does he state that he is "using AI to develop Linux kernel code."
What Torvalds said: "The code, the test programs, the review behind the list above and the first draft of this text were done with an LLM coding assistant (Claude Code) under my direction.” It sure sounds like he's using AI to develop kernel code to me.
Sounds like intelligent, effective planning, and I wish India the best of luck. Unfortunately, it will likely never happen in the US, due to entrenched interests, anti-education attitudes, and economic challenges -- not that the country as a whole couldn't afford it, but funds for higher education are being siphoned into private pockets.
More like, War Without Limits is another term for War Of Annihilation (Vernichtungskrieg)
The canonical example of a war of annihilation is Hitler's war on the Eastern Front. Adolf Hitler, March 30, 1941, speech before the generals of the Wehrmacht:
''' Fight two worldviews against each other. Devastating verdict on Bolshevism is equal to antisocial criminality. It is a FIGHT FOR ANNIHILATION. If we do not take it that way, we will beat the enemy, but in 30 years the Communist enemy will be facing us again. We are not waging war to preserve the enemy. ... Fight against Russia: destruction of Bolshevik commissioners and Communist INTELLIGENCE. ... The fight will be very different from the fight in the West. In the east, hardness is mild for the future. The leaders must sacrifice their concerns.''' [2]
That war was also supposed to end in a couple - three months but it lasted 4 years. A formal, whitewashed definition of Vernichtungskrieg was given in [1]:
'''War Of Annihilation is a radical form of warfare in which "all psycho-physical limits" are abolished which permits the decimation or even total destraction of a population. The state organization of the enemy is to be destroyed. Another characteristic of a war of annihilation is the dehumanization and rejection of negotiations with the enemy. The legitimacy of the opponent is negated and the opponent is demoted to status of a “total enemy,” with whom there can be no negotiations. “Total victory” of one's own "Volk, Krieg und Politik” (people, war and politics) is the purpose and successful outcome (“triumph”) of a war annihilation.''' [1]
[1] Jan Philipp Reemtsma: Die Idee des Vernichtungskrieges. Clausewitz – Ludendorff – Hitler, pp. 386–398, Zitat p. 397.
[2] Franz Halder: Kriegstagebuch. Tägliche Aufzeichnungen des Chefs des Generalstabes des Heeres 1939–1942, Bd. 2: Von der geplanten Landung in England bis zum Beginn des Ostfeldzuges. Kohlhammer Verlag, Stuttgart 1963, S. 335 ff.; Christian Hartmann: Halder. Generalstabschef Hitlers 1938–1942. Schoeningh, Paderborn 1991, S. 241 f.
Rather than comparing construction bills directly, levelized cost of energy (LCOE) incorporates construction, financing, operating expenses, fuel, and the amount of electricity produced.
Lazard's 2026 estimates are approximately:
Utility solar: $40–$88/MWh
Utility solar + storage: $61–$105/MWh
Nuclear: $141–$276/MWh
These are unsubsidized estimates and represent a range of project assumptions rather than guaranteed costs. Lazard specifically notes that its nuclear estimate is based on the publicly available costs of Vogtle 3 and 4, while its solar-plus-storage figure incorporates both generation and storage.
It's interesting how Gates has tried to morph from the no-holds-barred owner of a predatory software company to some kind of elder statesman. I certainly didn't trust him back then, and I see no reason to trust him now. Whatever he's trying to accomplish with these portentious pronouncements, you can be sure that it all stems from (unenlightened) self-interest.
I'd prefer to see you and others who don't worry about these things attack the argument and not the messenger.
It's frightening to be personally concerned about the possibility of this powerful technology getting out of control and to see little but conspiracizing in response.
Do you have any thoughts on why the concerns of Bill Gates, Geoffrey Hinton, Eliezer Yudkowsky, et al. are wrong? It would make me feel better.
reply