👁️👄👁️

🐢 do crime

We don’t believe that at all, we believe privacy is a human right. Also you’re just objectively wrong about LLMs. Offline uncensored LLMs already exist, and will perpetually exist. We don’t defend tools doing harm, we acknowledge it.

You miss the point. My point is that if you want to have a consistent view point, you need to acknowledge and defend the harmful sides. Encryption can objectively cause harm, but it should absolutely still be defended.

If it has the information, why not? Why should you be restricted by what a company deems appropriate. I obviously picked the bomb example as an extreme example, but that’s the point.

Just like I can demonize encryption by saying I should be allowed to secretly send illegal content. If I asked you straight up if encryption is a good thing, you’d probably agree. If I mentioned its inevitable bad use in a shocking manner, would you defend the ability to do that, or change your stance that encryption is bad?

To have a strong stance means also defending the potential harmful effects, since they’re inevitable. It’s hard to keep values consistent, even when there are potential harmful effects of something that’s for the greater good. Encryption is a perfect example of that.

Do gun manufacturers get in trouble when someone shoots somebody?

Do car manufacturers get in trouble when someone runs somebody over?

Do search engines get in trouble if they accidentally link to harmful sites?

What about social media sites getting in trouble for users uploading illegal content?

Mozilla doesn’t need to host an uncensored model, but their open source AI should be able to be trained to uncensored. So I’m not asking them to host this themselves, which is an important distinction I should have made.

Which uncensored LLMs exist already, so any argument about the damage they can cause is already possible.

Anything that prevents it from my answering my query. If I ask it how to make me a bomb, I don’t want it to be censored. It’s gathering this from public data they don’t own after all. I agree with Mozilla’s principles, but also LLMs are tools and should be treated as such.

As much as I love Mozilla, I know they’re going to censor it (sorry, the word is “alignment” now) the hell out of it to fit their perceived values. Luckily if it’s open source then people will be able to train uncensored models

this guy just learned about discord general chats lol

they’re all this bad, and also they’re absolutely dogshit for open source software so I have no idea why people make them

Services aren’t source code lol

this had me deadass laughin fr fr no cap

I see zero reason to use Ubuntu over Fedora

Selinux is more secure then app armor, but more difficult to use. Ubuntu is also pretty secure, I’m just not as familiar with it. I mentioned it for the privacy but, since it used to have some Amazon bloat crapped bundled and telemetry built in.

Pretty much any distro that isn’t Ubuntu. Are you asking for privacy or security? Those are very different.

For security, I’d stick to more complete distros like Fedora instead of more diy distros like NixOS or Arch. They’re great to learn and tinker with, but distros like Fedora have security experts adding mitigations and security stuff in the distro by default, whereas most users of Arch or something would have to manually look up those things and keep up to date on the latest security. So basically, none of them lol.

Using more hardcore security distros like QubesOS is not very realistic as a daily driver. You’ll see Linux nerds name drop it and claim they know what they’re talking about, but none of them will actually dailt drive it because it’s a very painful experience. Just stick with flatpaks as much as you can for pretty solid security.