Richard Armuelles

Most people who call AI code “slop” write code best described as “the stuff pigs make after they eat some slop”. … or they haven’t shipped any significant code at all.

Last year, Mullvad (a VPN company) co-founder Daniel Berntsson gave a personal donation of roughly $500k USD to the Swedish Örebro Party -- a political party which calls for stricter immigration policies and "extensive remigration". What happened next is... predictable. According to reports, roughly a quarter of the staff of Mullvad joined an internal chat criticizing the donation, with many calling for Berntsson to resign. Which Berntsson refused to do. After several Leftist outlets in Europe criticized the donation, @mullvadnet issued a statement supporting the co-Founders right to make any donation he wants... but offering customers upset by this a refund on their services. Then Tor got involved. Mullvad is the single largest contributor to the Tor Project, providing well over $1 Million USD annually. As you might guess... this made the Leftists very angry. "highly racist, white supremacist" "it is the reason I have had to resign as a Tor Browser developer" With some calling for "a clean break" from "Nazi CEOs". Tor responded to these attacks with the following statement: "Tor Project has paused proactive co-branding with Mullvad. That pause applies to joint promotional activity while the technical collaboration continues in alignment with our narrowly scoped agreement. We have also reviewed how Mullvad Browser is described and endorsed on our owned channels, and clarified language suggesting broader alignment between our values. These changes are intended to describe the relationship more accurately and avoid notions of implied endorsement." The @torproject then by changing the way they describe their relationship with Mullvad from "great value alignment" to a "a narrowly-scoped technical collaboration". This, as you can imagine, made the Leftists even angrier (because they always get angrier... no matter what). The attacks on Tor intensified, with Leftists calling their position: "if we get money from right-wing extremists, well, we take it".

The big Linux Kernel AI fight is heating up. 3 days ago, an anti-AI activist (Laurent Pinchart) was elected to the Linux Kernel Technical Advisory Board. Pinchart, who says there is “no ethical justification for the use of generative AI in FOSS development” (and that it is being used to “undermine democracy”), recently had a rejected Open Source Summit proposal entitled “How we can resist generative AI”. After that speech was rejected, he said he “will think of a plan B”. Plan B, apparently, involved getting on the Technical Advisory Board. Now Pinchart is pushing to have Linux adopt anti-AI policies. When long time Linux developer, Ted Tso, asked, “Who cares if [high quality contributions] are AI-generated or not?” Pinchart responded, “I do.” “There is a small number of very vocal long term maintainers who,” Pinchart said, “never really cared about the people making the kernel. That show a very strong enthusiasm for LLM’s.” “It’s borderline sickening,” he stated. This is happening as Linux Kernel patches shot past 20% (of all patches) during the month of October.