--- title: Linus Torvalds to AI critics: use it, fork it, or leave description: Linus Torvalds responded sharply on the Linux kernel mailing list to developers pushing back against AI tooling, stating Linux is not an anti-AI project. The... canonical: https://daily.dev/posts/linus-torvalds-to-ai-critics-use-it-fork-it-or-leave-vc2bcux3e twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:site: @dailydotdev og:type: website og:site_name: daily.dev og:title: Linus Torvalds to AI critics: use it, fork it, or leave | daily.dev og:description: Linus Torvalds responded sharply on the Linux kernel mailing list to developers pushing back against AI tooling, stating Linux is not an anti-AI project. The... og:url: https://daily.dev/posts/linus-torvalds-to-ai-critics-use-it-fork-it-or-leave-vc2bcux3e og:image: https://api.daily.dev/og/posts/vC2bCuX3E.png og:image:alt: Linus Torvalds to AI critics: use it, fork it, or leave og:image:width: 1200 og:image:height: 630 og:locale: en --- > ## Documentation Index > Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://daily.dev/llms.txt > Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further. # Linus Torvalds to AI critics: use it, fork it, or leave **[Trends](https://daily.dev/sources/trends)** · 3 min read · 14 upvotes · 5 comments ## Summary Linus Torvalds responded sharply on the Linux kernel mailing list to developers pushing back against AI tooling, stating Linux is not an anti-AI project. The controversy was sparked by Sashiko, an AI code review tool proposed to automatically email patch authors with AI-generated feedback. Torvalds' stance: AI tools are just tools, nobody is forced to use them but nobody can ban them either. He compared LLM-assisted code to compiler output, rejecting the framing that AI 'writes' code. The ideological debate he largely shut down; the practical concern — automated AI reviews adding noise and burden to already-stretched maintainers — remains an open and legitimate question. ## Content Linus Torvalds posted to the Linux kernel mailing list this week and made his position on AI tooling about as clear as he ever makes anything: Linux is not an anti-AI project, and if you want to argue otherwise, he will loudly ignore you. "Fork it. Or just walk away." The immediate trigger was a debate over Sashiko, an agentic patch review tool that uses LLMs to flag potential bugs for human maintainers. The controversy wasn't really about AI in the abstract — it was about whether Sashiko should automatically email patch authors with AI-generated feedback before any human had reviewed it. That's the line Torvalds drew: AI tools should help maintainers handle their workload, not add to it by generating noise that contributors then have to respond to. His actual position is more measured than the headlines suggest. He's not telling anyone to use AI. He's saying he won't penalize those who do, and he won't let ideological opposition to AI tools drive technical decisions. "The kernel project is technology-driven, not ideologically driven" is the gist. Decisions get made on technical merit. That's it. What makes this interesting is how far he's traveled to get here. In late 2023, Torvalds was dismissing AI as "90 percent marketing" and joking about being replaced. By late 2025 he'd warmed up enough to try an AI IDE on a personal project. In April 2026, Linux 7.0 shipped with an official AI Coding Assistants policy — licensing rules, responsibility tags, human accountability requirements. By July 2026, he's telling critics to fork the kernel. That's a real arc. He's still not naive about the costs. He acknowledged that AI-generated submissions increase maintainer workload and that hallucinated bug reports are a real problem — he'd previously complained about AI-generated vulnerability reports flooding the security mailing list. His answer isn't to ban the tools; it's to make the tools better at helping rather than burdening the people who have to review everything. The backlash to the backlash is where it gets a little muddled. Some developers read Torvalds' statement as a green light for vibe-coding kernel patches, which it clearly isn't. Omar Cornut put it well: "stating 'AI is just a tool' doesn't give anyone a mandate nor an encouragement to naively vibeslop the kernel." The Linux project already requires human review, proper tagging of AI-assisted work, and the ability to defend every line you submit. None of that changed. The compiler analogy Torvalds floated is worth sitting with: developers don't credit compilers for writing their code, so the framing of "AI wrote this" is doing something weird. The accountability still sits with the contributor. That's the actual policy, and it's pretty reasonable. The broader Linux ecosystem is less unified. Ubuntu has been embracing AI tooling. The Fedora community voted down an "AI Developer Desktop" proposal. Red Hat and open-source security firm nolabs have both echoed Torvalds' line that human accountability matters more than whether AI helped write the code — but that consensus doesn't extend everywhere. What Torvalds actually said is defensible. What some people heard — that the kernel is now open to AI-generated slop as long as you tag it — is not what he said. The gap between those two readings is where most of the current discourse lives. ## Questions this post answers ### What is Linux's official policy on AI-assisted code contributions? Linux 7.0, shipped in April 2026, introduced an official AI Coding Assistants policy covering licensing rules, responsibility tags, and human accountability requirements. Contributors must tag AI-assisted work and remain accountable for every line submitted, regardless of whether AI helped write it. Human review is still mandatory before any patch is merged. _Teams weighing AI-assisted contribution policies can track how kernel projects govern this on daily.dev._ ### Why did the Sashiko AI patch review tool cause controversy on the Linux kernel mailing list? Sashiko is an agentic patch review tool that uses LLMs to flag potential bugs for maintainers, and the controversy was over whether it should automatically email AI-generated feedback directly to patch authors before any human had reviewed it. Torvalds framed the issue as AI tools adding to maintainer workload rather than easing it, not opposition to AI itself. _Maintainers evaluating AI review bots for their own projects can follow this kind of tooling debate on daily.dev._ ### Did Linus Torvalds say vibe coding is now acceptable for Linux kernel patches? No, Torvalds' statement that Linux is not ideologically anti-AI was not an endorsement of unreviewed vibe-coded patches. Developer Omar Cornut noted that saying AI is just a tool gives no mandate to naively submit AI-generated slop, and the kernel still requires human review, proper AI-assistance tagging, and contributor accountability for every submitted line. _Contributors sorting real policy from hot takes on AI in open source can follow the discussion on daily.dev._ ## Community discussion Top comments from developers on daily.dev. **@ralsei** · 2 upvotes > This discourse is fascinating. Very valid points from both sides. > > Thread starts here: [https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/20260530103004.6fe2ffa7@foz.lan/](https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/20260530103004.6fe2ffa7@foz.lan/) **@geekluffy** · 1 upvotes > AI is just a new compiler. If your compiler outputs a bug, it's still your fault. Developers remain 100% responsible for their code. **@akashskypatel** · 0 upvotes > Based as always --- Tags: [#open-source](https://daily.dev/tags/open-source), [#linux](https://daily.dev/tags/linux), [#llm](https://daily.dev/tags/llm), [#ai-coding](https://daily.dev/tags/ai-coding) [View this post on daily.dev](https://daily.dev/posts/linus-torvalds-to-ai-critics-use-it-fork-it-or-leave-vc2bcux3e) ```json {"@context":"https://schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https://daily.dev/#organization","name":"daily.dev","url":"https://daily.dev","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://daily.dev/apple-touch-icon.png","width":180,"height":180},"sameAs":["https://twitter.com/dailydotdev","https://github.com/dailydotdev","https://www.linkedin.com/company/daily-dev-ltd"]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https://daily.dev/#website","url":"https://daily.dev","name":"daily.dev","publisher":{"@id":"https://daily.dev/#organization"},"potentialAction":{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https://daily.dev/search?q={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}}]} {"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"TechArticle","headline":"Linus Torvalds to AI critics: use it, fork it, or leave","url":"https://daily.dev/posts/linus-torvalds-to-ai-critics-use-it-fork-it-or-leave-vc2bcux3e","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://daily.dev/posts/linus-torvalds-to-ai-critics-use-it-fork-it-or-leave-vc2bcux3e"},"datePublished":"2026-07-15T12:57:51.610Z","dateModified":"2026-09-13T19:36:04.698Z","description":"Linus Torvalds responded sharply on the Linux kernel mailing list to developers pushing back against AI tooling, stating Linux is not an anti-AI project. The...","image":"https://i.ytimg.com/vi/RIZPuhzy0YU/sddefault.jpg","thumbnailUrl":"https://i.ytimg.com/vi/RIZPuhzy0YU/sddefault.jpg","isAccessibleForFree":true,"articleSection":"Trends","inLanguage":"en","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"daily.dev","url":"https://daily.dev","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://daily.dev/apple-touch-icon.png","width":180,"height":180}},"author":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Trends","logo":"https://media.daily.dev/image/upload/s--ZfSp3asX--/f_auto,q_auto/v1780996004/logos/trends?_a=BAMAMiWQ0","url":"https://daily.dev/sources/trends"},"commentCount":5,"discussionUrl":"https://daily.dev/posts/linus-torvalds-to-ai-critics-use-it-fork-it-or-leave-vc2bcux3e","interactionStatistic":[{"@type":"InteractionCounter","interactionType":{"@type":"LikeAction"},"userInteractionCount":14},{"@type":"InteractionCounter","interactionType":{"@type":"CommentAction"},"userInteractionCount":5}],"keywords":"open-source,linux,llm,ai-coding","timeRequired":"PT3M"} {"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https://daily.dev"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Trends","item":"https://daily.dev/sources/trends"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Linus Torvalds to AI critics: use it, fork it, or leave"}]} {"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://daily.dev/posts/linus-torvalds-to-ai-critics-use-it-fork-it-or-leave-vc2bcux3e","comment":[{"@type":"Comment","text":"This discourse is fascinating. Very valid points from both sides.\nThread starts here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/20260530103004.6fe2ffa7@foz.lan/","datePublished":"2026-07-16T16:07:14.394Z","url":"https://daily.dev/posts/vC2bCuX3E#c-MREy6ZABe","author":{"@type":"Person","name":"Ralsei","url":"https://daily.dev/ralsei","image":"https://media.daily.dev/image/upload/s--4OFiaBRW--/f_auto/v1770997251/avatars/avatar_GZQ6TUkl08VeKSBvLh49j?_a=BAMAMiiu0"},"interactionStatistic":{"@type":"InteractionCounter","interactionType":{"@type":"LikeAction"},"userInteractionCount":2}},{"@type":"Comment","text":"AI is just a new compiler. If your compiler outputs a bug, it’s still your fault. Developers remain 100% responsible for their code.","datePublished":"2026-07-17T10:39:58.785Z","url":"https://daily.dev/posts/vC2bCuX3E#c-koaiNidYG","author":{"@type":"Person","name":"GeekLuffy","url":"https://daily.dev/geekluffy","image":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/71143694?v=4"},"interactionStatistic":{"@type":"InteractionCounter","interactionType":{"@type":"LikeAction"},"userInteractionCount":1}},{"@type":"Comment","text":"Based as always","datePublished":"2026-07-16T15:32:37.059Z","url":"https://daily.dev/posts/vC2bCuX3E#c-CQ9uga8RE","author":{"@type":"Person","name":"Akash","url":"https://daily.dev/akashskypatel","image":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/8129618?v=4"}}]} {"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"FAQPage","@id":"https://daily.dev/posts/linus-torvalds-to-ai-critics-use-it-fork-it-or-leave-vc2bcux3e#faq","mainEntity":[{"@type":"Question","name":"What is Linux's official policy on AI-assisted code contributions?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Linux 7.0, shipped in April 2026, introduced an official AI Coding Assistants policy covering licensing rules, responsibility tags, and human accountability requirements. Contributors must tag AI-assisted work and remain accountable for every line submitted, regardless of whether AI helped write it. Human review is still mandatory before any patch is merged. Teams weighing AI-assisted contribution policies can track how kernel projects govern this on daily.dev."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Why did the Sashiko AI patch review tool cause controversy on the Linux kernel mailing list?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Sashiko is an agentic patch review tool that uses LLMs to flag potential bugs for maintainers, and the controversy was over whether it should automatically email AI-generated feedback directly to patch authors before any human had reviewed it. Torvalds framed the issue as AI tools adding to maintainer workload rather than easing it, not opposition to AI itself. Maintainers evaluating AI review bots for their own projects can follow this kind of tooling debate on daily.dev."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Did Linus Torvalds say vibe coding is now acceptable for Linux kernel patches?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"No, Torvalds' statement that Linux is not ideologically anti-AI was not an endorsement of unreviewed vibe-coded patches. Developer Omar Cornut noted that saying AI is just a tool gives no mandate to naively submit AI-generated slop, and the kernel still requires human review, proper AI-assistance tagging, and contributor accountability for every submitted line. Contributors sorting real policy from hot takes on AI in open source can follow the discussion on daily.dev."}}]} ```