Do you think it would be possible for an AI system to be embedded inside an operating system and communicate directly with the kernel through well-defined APIs?From a technical perspective, this would require exposing a controlled interface between kernel space and a user-space AI service, most likely through secure system calls, ioctl interfaces, or dedicated kernel APIs designed for telemetry exchange and decision requests.The AI would not run inside the kernel itself, but instead operate as a privileged user-space daemon that interacts with kernel subsystems—such as the scheduler, memory manager, or I/O controller—via structured API endpoints. These APIs would provide real-time system data (CPU load, memory pressure, syscall patterns) and accept optimization decisions or policy updates from the AI model.To maintain stability and security, the communication layer would need strict validation, rate limiting, and sandboxing, potentially using capability-based security or Trusted Execution Environments. This ensures the kernel remains deterministic while still allowing the AI to influence system behavior indirectly through controlled API calls.
>>108953159Everything is possible for vibeGODS
>>108953171Except actually learning. Now why is that?
>>108953180Cope
>>108953201>HURR COPEThe favorite canned rebuttal for retarded subhumans who don't know shit. A classic. :^)
>>108953159your syscalls bro?
>>108953159just give it root shell access
>>108953201That's all you can say
>>108953217Give him some break.After whole 5 seconds of attention span he needs to return to his safe space
>>108953159It's not just possible emdash it's trivial. >>108953282Main problem is what do you expect the llm to do? The Kernel brings forth innumerable things to nurture the model.The model has nothing good with which to recompense the kernel.
>>108953180AI teaches things better than books, teachers
