undefined
@sabrina @lu_leipzig If the problem is values, it is not clear to me collective decision making will turn out better than top-down decision making. Then the question is whether the collective has good values.
At the moment, my goal is a separation. Allowing the people whose values reject LLMs to coordinate with each other and develop software without people who will try to inject LLM support or outputs being given an opportunity to do so.
@lispi314 @leo @pinkRhododendron I have a Steam Deck for games. But I still need to be able to run OBS on the laptop, what if I run the Steam Deck into it
@lispi314 @leo @pinkRhododendron I need vulkan, webgpu, sdl_gpu and complex audio routing. If I can't run flatpaks I'm going to have really big problems. I have a webcam, I have a video capture card, I stream using OBS, I expect my AMD video compression acceleration to work. I expect to use my computer as a computer. I *am* looking at btrfs for my backup drive :(
@pinkRhododendron @leo i was already looking at learning linux kernel development to use some of these audio devices without windows
@pinkRhododendron @leo I want this more than I want a computer.
@lu_leipzig So far pushback seems to have had no impact on projects and I see no organized attempts to fork more than a couple scattered projects in protest of AI infection. If we want a best case scenario we have to take steps toward making it happen.
@leo Thanks for this information. I cannot describe the extent of my sadness at the idea of having to use BSD, but thank you for this information.
@leo @algernon I thought this was only for documentation, for now?
To be clear, it is my intent to eventually move entirely to software which is either no-AI by license or forked from pre-AI code. If it means I have to throw away Linux I throw away Linux. Linux is an inferior product I am *only* using because Windows added AI. Why the fuck am I using Linux if it's also AI?
@leo @algernon Anyway IBM's position on is AI is enough to cause me to not use their linux distribution even though I think it would work on my laptop better
… I mean also their position on the GPL wrt RHEL and whether RHEL is following it. Basically my view of their lawyers right now is about the way I'd view a crowbar wedged into the community center cashbox
@leo @algernon If it were my project i would ban the contributor. One line or not they are not following the DCO as written which this project requires. So either the DCO is violated, the DCO has a "you can do anything as long as it's through a hole in a sheet" exception for AI, or the DCO is not enforced at all, or most likely this crept up on OpenZFS and they have never thought about this and did not notice the claude line.
@det I'm a bit concerned about RHEL.
I deleted because if there was any chance of error, I didn't want to leave it up, but a PR'd one line change is still enough for me to complain.
The thing is, my understanding is you have to use the tool in a particular way for it to actually create the committed-with header. For more complex uses I believe the header does not show up.
It's like finding out the open source community's got black mold
@SpaceLifeForm True, however it's worth remembering that even if you are paying you sometimes find out you are the product