Anyone know the status of Chimera Linux wrt age verification?

VSCode/Codium with vim mode. Regular vim if I’m stuck in text land.

I haven’t tried neovim. Supposedly that could handle everything I need out of vscode, but it’s easier to not be an odd one out at work.

Cursed knowledge.

How many vulnerabilities would’ve been found if we had spent several million dollars on human security researchers though?

Perpetual loop of “bounty encourages bad reports”, “canceled bounty”, “bug reports improve”, “bounty comes back”, “bounty encourages bad reports”…

“If you’re thinking without writing, you only think you’re thinking.”

I agree with Prime on most things, but I think he’s getting this one wrong.

There are more options than just “light-hearted satire” and “earnest business idea”.

The FOSDEM talk is silly, and reads like a skit, but it has a gravely serious undertone.

The security guy has posted on Twitter “I still can’t believe he hooked it up to Stripe lol”.

Meanwhile the LinkedIn of the other guy describes him as a “researcher of political economy of FOSS” at Rochester Institute of Technology, and he runs a non-profit about FOSS for humanitarian aid.

He’s also been very active replying to people talking about the conference talk or the Malus site, asking whether they think this should be legal and what we can do to protect the future of open source.

I think these are people who take this threat very seriously, and are willing to expose themselves to litigation in order to force the issue into courts.

Ever is an extremely long time.

Probably not for technical reasons, but for IP reasons: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46554890

To be clear, the best case scenario here is a Chrome vs Chromium scenario, because they want the ability to slip in some proprietary components into their official build in order to play nicely with their paid services.

Seems fair to me, and I understand why that’s a substantial effort if they’re still at basically a PoC stage.

Edit: And for the record, I am much happier paying With Reach (Kagi) with my dollars than I ever was paying Google with my data, so I’m very much in favor of this model. Still, some neckbeards only wanna use software from orgs who are in it “for the love of the game”.

I’ve got some skepticism alarms going off on this one.

What exactly does “basically reverse engineered some assembly” mean here? Decompiled to C?

And what do you mean by “remake in assembly”? Like, literally writing assembly by hand? Or compiling C source?

I’m not a lawyer, but my guess is that binary-to-binary translation isn’t enough to strip the license, even if you’re making a pit stop in a higher-level language.

Dijkstra on the foolishness of natural language programming

But like, what does he know? He wasn’t an AI-native vibe orchestrator.

This analysis is spot-on. I especially think you’re onto something with your reference to the commons. (Edit: The generative AI movement could be a seen as a modern reincarnation of enclosure)

These guys think of a commons in a sense of ownership: if I own something, I can do whatever I want with it.

But the real historical examples of a commons are more like a mutual obligation. It’s a relationship, not a delivery of inert goods. Yes, you get access to the benefits of the commons, but that comes hand-in-hand with accepting the duty to care for the commons as an ongoing entity.

That’s what really irks me about all of this. They didn’t “steal” something. They killed a collective organism.

Primeagen mentioned it here, noting that sqlite does this

Not sure about Apple-mediated payments, but you can usually support the creator more directly and get an ad-free RSS feed that you can plug into the Podcasts app and it Just Works™. Usually ends up being a better deal for the creator, too.

I don’t think there’s any disagreement (among you, me, and Molly White) about who the bad guys are.

The question is: What is an effective legal framework that focuses on the precise harms, doesn’t allow AI vendors to easily evade accountability, and doesn’t inflict widespread collateral damage?

Cory Doctorow has a pretty good stab at that: https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/17/how-to-think-about-scraping/

Clarification: revenue from advertising their own paid services, not revenue from selling ad space to third parties

People who are discounting this because the project maintainer used sensational phrasing (75%) or because he was monetizing open source are ignoring the important part:

Traffic is down 40%

This is really bad news. All open source projects need attention in order to succeed.

“Wait, not like that”: Free and open access in the age of generative AI

The real threat isn’t AI using open knowledge — it’s AI companies killing the projects that make knowledge free

https://www.citationneeded.news/free-and-open-access-in-the-age-of-generative-ai/

Money-making is an orthogonal issue. LLMs subvert engagement with open source projects, which is important for their health whether or not there’s anyone trying to monetize that engagement.

Nix, but I’d only recommend it if you share my same brand of mental illness