On Wed, Oct 14, 2026 at 02:42:09PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) wrote: > On Tue, Oct 13, 2026 at 11:23:53PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> > I think we're going about this the wrong way. What we want is high > > quality contributions. If they are high quality, who cares if they > > are AI-generated or not? > Recently 2 people sent 1,000 patches over 2 hours. Care to check each and > every patch for 'quality'? :) Only the beginning. And, crucially, unlike what would have tended to happen in the past with mass patch sending a lot of the time the patches tend not to be repetitive patches fixing the same issue in the same way in many places like are seen when someone has a shiny new static check. > > I also suspect it should be possible to use something like Jev or some > > other System One LLM to help with an initial prioritization for the > > patch, and then have that prioritization be set in patchwork. Each > Using AI to detect AI right now works, who knows in the future. But that's > an arms race which we'll eventually lose. Which also costs money... Reports I've seen from other areas suggest a noticable false positive rate even with the current stuff.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
