No Thanks
I'd rather Google's AI died than that I had $30k for helping a bunch of bastards make billions.
167 publicly visible posts • joined 15 Jun 2020
The issue of course is that Wayland's developers thought "We don't use these features, let's take them out". Which is nice for them, and shit for everyone who does use a remote GUI.
It's just ego; same as systemd and freedesktop.org. Wankers slapping themselves on the backs and cashing the cheques from sponsors.
"The only ones who have a say on the license of a project are the people/entities who start said projects."
I agree - if people are stupid enough to work for Apple for free then that's their lookout. I'm not, so I'll never use the BSD license for my own output. The richest company in the world can pay their fucking developers themselves.
"But as the Israelis and others have shown, it's possible to do better and place a much less damaging missile right into the window of a specified apartment and at least only kill the immediate neighbours and not the entire building."
So why have they levelled entire buildings over and over again? (Answer: Because they are genocidal maniacs).
LLMs are not reasoning engines. An LLM takes your input (and a hidden setup script) and then produces text which looks like text it has already seen of people talking about the things in your input. It does no reasoning whatsoever. It picks a syllable that looks right, then it picks another one and it keeps going until it's RNG says to stop.
This is useful if you are writing code which is normal boilerplate or summarising well known works or even just boring reports that look like a million other boring reports. It won't generally design a new algorithm for a problem you've hit while researching something novel.
People need to get it into their heads that an LLM simulates what it has already encountered and the input is nothing more that context for that process. This is not intelligence, artificial or otherwise and anyone that tells you it is is lying.
LLM are about as close to general AI as a motorboat is to the butterfly stroke. You might make progress across the water in the former but you will learn nothing about the latter in the process.
It's all fairy tales and nonsense. Normally this sort of bullshit is for the benefit of the marks they're going to sell the company to before legging it but I increasingly feel that the OpenAI and Google AI people actually believe their own hype.
So you think that Anthropic paid for all those books? I'd like to see the receipts.
Leaving that aside, the storage and transformation of text is almost certainly going to run afoul of the restrictions placed in most books.
I don't think these lazy parasites can win; they certainly should not be allowed to win.
That's a weasel excuse and a half, an a fairly obvious troll.
Aside from anything else, if someone writes books in the style of another author they ARE regarded as a hack; it's not accepted from humans and it certainly doesn't have to be accepted from a machine.
Secondly, while authors are influenced by books they've read they generally are books they have paid for. The issue here is copyright. Google opened the door with their Books project and the "AI" companies are hoping to repeat their success.
As a very long-time and happy Gentoo user I know exactly what you mean but when I use Ubuntu (which I must for work) it makes me shudder. Cannonical not only don't want to think outside the box, they want you to get in the box they've built and stay there.
There's a fine line in software development - not just Free or Open - you want to pay enough to get useful things done but not so much that constantly making changes to the existing software is a viable business plan.
Fascism, ultimately, is the belief that the "deserving" minority should band together in order to exert their will on the minority. It seems pretty obvious that Musk believes that too. Insofar as he actually has any coherent thought in his increasingly drug-addled brain.
Raised on a myth of his own manifest destiny by a creepy mother with a Mary Mother of God complex, Musk's achievements are relatively minor compared to his ego. Like Steve Jobs, his role is largely to sit in his own mess and scream at others to do what he demands, whether it is possible or not. This is surprisingly effective when the manbaby's demands are possible but the fact remains that it's not his work that built Space-X or Tesla and, really, his strange demands are probably going to destroy at least the latter.
Criticism of Musk is seen by him as something that must be crushed - the plebs have no right to challenge the modern-day Aryan ubermench living in his ivory Randian Tower. He has the money so he has the power. It's a deluded cycle: he has money so he has the power to demand he is paid billions for other people's achievements, which grants him more power and more arrogance.
He hates democracy - he supports Trump because Trump hates democracy too. They are very similar, and moreso with every passing month. They are the deserving - they can prove it by showing how much money they've managed to accumulate. Banding together into a fasces bound by their mutual love of doing whatever they like, they beat away at the idea that the voice of the masses should be granted a hearing in the circles of power using the propaganda machines that they have built (or stolen).
Musk is a Fascist.
It's the curse of professionalising software development for direct commercial reward - if the product is "done done" then you're out of a job. When dealing with something completely subjective like UI design, you can "justify" new releases forever, or until you retire anyway.
This is AI, though. Almost by definition (i.e., the training data) the problem here is YOU. So-called AI works by assuming that you are not looking for anything special and that the results served up to the bulk of people will do you too. The current attempt at AI is just an automatic echo-chamber construction engine.
Get a list of previous outcomes for this context (or the context the system thinks it has), stick softmax on it and job's done. £££££
The issue here is that Debian did not create systemd but approved its use even though the fundamental security problems in the design - not just the implementation - were there for all to see. That brings into question the value of their judgement as to what constitutes a safe system in general.
There's a lot of promise in large-scale batteries that use iron. Useless for cars etc., but potentially fine for bulk uses like storing wind farm generation.
Plus, people could just use less. Crazy idea I know - capitalism is all about growth. Maybe that's the source of the problem right there.
Why? What value does it have beyond almost but not quite doing what X11 already does? How many people are using a graphical Ubuntu on a multi-user system where the supposed security issues on X11 are relevant?
I don't mind developers wasting their own time but I object to having their half-arsed systems installed by default.
WP is literally just a badly edited selection of web search results - many entries are simply copied directly form other sites. The only useful part of a WP page is generally the links at the bottom and they're only useful because search engines artificially boost WP pages so far up the rankings that the original source material is generally hard to find.
So, banning WP has zero effect on any sort of material being on the web. In fact, if the local search engines stop pushing WP, you've probably made it easier to find "blasphemous" material.
"Investors are not stupid, and IF (not sure if they do push this TBH) they are insisting that a company uses Amazon, Microsoft or Google, it's for a good reason."
Firstly, VC investors are stupid. That's why 12 in every 13 of their investments tanks.
Secondly, when I was getting VC funding back in the day it came with one particularly odd string which was that we had to host on Dell hardware because Dell were giving them backhanders. They even suggested that we should not try to optimise the application too much as they would like to ask Dell for bigger hardware and therefore a bigger sweetener (basically Dell wanted to boast about installed CPUs).
None of the things you listed are of any real value to a startup; even uptime.
VCs know nothing. If they did, they'd do it themselves or have a decent hit-rate.
"What I do want is multiple workspaces, a responsive window manager which stays out of the way, and a menu/taskbar/keyboard shortcuts to manipulate windows and access applications. I get that on Linux with an old-school, lightweight, minimalist window manager (Fluxbox in my case, Blackbox before that) which I have used happily for over two decades).
Then there is the NEXTStep/Window Maker/Mac OS model - doesn't work particularly for me, but clearly does for many."
I use WindowMaker with multiple workspaces for exactly the reasons you gave; what doesn't work for you about it?