stsquad

Who are the community employing? Why do they need consulting before code changes are made?

What a pointless drama article this is. FLOSS software does stuff for legal compliance more often than you'd think. The whole point is people can contribute fly by patches and the maintainers make the decision to merge. It seems like being an optional field but potentially providing useful functionality is enough for systemd. If you don't like it I'm sure there are forks you could join or even use a different init system. No one's freedom is being oppressed here.

The western nations had a similar problem with debathification in Iraq. When a system invades and takes over a state how do you keep things running while ripping it's influence out?

There's a scene at the end of Band of Brothers where the guy from Easy company is taking to a German who's recollecting the countries he's visited while at war. It's a reminder that not everyone in Germany was a Nazi but it was hard to sit it out in a nation committed to Total War. It might be easy to say you'd never sign up to the party but if the choice was between staying in the civil service or being shipped off into the meat grinder? Where else could you go?

We never really have the luxury of tearing down whole societies and rebuilding from scratch in a more prefect form. Generally the countries that have gone through such radical changes have paid for it with a lot of suffering.

I mean chemistry is mostly fractions right?

I was shown Schrödinger's equation at the start of my chemistry degree just so we knew what the physicists had to worry about.

Stable package > back port package > flatpak/snap.

Basically I want everything as stable as possible unless I have a particular need for a newer feature.

The main things I run from flatpak/snap are browsers and the Minecraft launcher because they are both regularly updated.

I expect because it wasn't a user - just a random passer by throwing stones on their own personal crusade. The project only has two major contributors who are now being harassed in the issues for the choices they make about how to run their project.

Someone might fork it and continue with pure artisanal human crafted code but such forks tend to die off in the long run.

Glad it applies worldwide /s

Slop can't be copyrighted, great. We don't want slop.

There is no settled legal status on the output of AI systems and it's certainly something that does need clarification going forward. The law may treat asking an LLM to regurgitate it's training data vs following instructions in a local context differently. Human engineers are allowed to use "retained knowledge" from their experiences even if they can't bring their notebooks from previous careers. LLMs are just better at it.

It looks like the issue submitter is trolling a number of projects on their personal anti-AI crusade. I would take it more seriously if they had reviewed any of the PRs and identified issues with them.

Yes AI slop is an issue (especially for maintainers) but it can still be a useful tool. If the maintainers want to use AI on their own code it should be their choice. Most forks fail because the righteous feeling of finally getting your own way on a repo you control usually falls away as you realise the people actually doing the work didn't follow you.

There was someone who wrote up a bootstrapping guide for technology assuming an apocalypse sent us back to sticks and stones. I think that guide went much further back on the level of lithography you could meaningfully get to while restarting tech.

I am curious what size features this guy can create in his lab.

The chain of trust will depend on the hardware. I would expect on a Steam Deck it would be Valve all the way. If it was Ubuntu it would be Microsoft then Canonical. I doubt any random distro would be acceptable to the games wanting to enforce anti cheat.

You want to be sure if the integrity of the binaries that are running. That needs a chain of trust from firmware to user space.