Was außer spekulativer Blödsinn und Angstmacherei treibt denn in der jetzigen Situation die Preise tatsächlich noch weiter?
Ich würde vermuten:
As I wrote below, it is a matter of boundaries.
Bad maintainer throws hissy fit when caught breaking the rules for contribution.
Do people do that because of AI mania?
But yes, I think this will bring the Void Linux distribution a couple of supportive users, some new people curious to try it, and perhaps new maintainers which share their view.
They mean no one can be reasonably be up to date on software security updates, and (ideally) ensuring all packages changes are not malicious (as well as the small stuff like properly integrating to the distro, but idk how void works enough to comment on that)
Some people do an astounding amount of work.
And then there are many, many, which help a little.
Also, if, say, somebody finds that in Debian testing is a malicious package, people which maintain Arch will learn that. Open information sharing between many thousands of people willing to coordinate is a superpower.
AI or not, I refuse to believe anyone is capable of being the sole maintainer of 100+ anything while preserving any kind of quality. Most of these packages were probably functionally abandoned already, if not technically.
He/She was maintainer of the Void Linux packages, that is the package build scripts, updates, etc., not the projects and source code which these packages are based on.
For example, Guix has now over 32000 packages, including an Emacs package. But of course, they did not re-create Emacs to make that package - they just made a build definition which uses the Emacs git repo, in order to build the Guix package. Or in the case of Ubuntu, it is based on the package definitions in Debian testing, so the Ubuntu maintainers do not have to write all the build scripts or package definitions - but they still have to do significant work in order to adapt them that everything fits together.
Or with Arch Linux, the packages are taken relatively vanilla from upstream, they package stuff more “as is” as compared to Debian. Which means less work, and often more clarity for experienced users.
Coming back to Void Linux, this means for these 100+ Void Linux packages which are currently orphaned, it is feasible that other people with good Linux experience adopt these, with a reasonable effort - some are important.
You are absolutely right about Sartre. Some bad nights I dream I am talking with confused bots, and can’t exit by switching off the box.
You argue that it is not possible to keep up such rules.
Do we need to live in a police state to keep people from stealing?
i need proof of the already proben impact of AI and AI datacenters over territories in the country i live in?
No, proof about the maintainers intentions. Because you make a statement about them.
(And besides, making statements about other people’s intentions is already stirring conflict, because normally only a person theirself knows what is happening in their mind and their heart, so stating what is happening inside somebody else is already a kind of transgression, a violation of boundaries. Which stirs empty conflict, whether you want that or not.)
I totally agree that there are very strong reasons to avoid LLM use (“AI”). Also fed up with the ham-fisted manners it is shoved in every place by companies, like github copilot. Also, all the BS in advertising it, with dishonest arguments. Also, its glaring links to authoritarianism. And I am extremely worried about the implications of “AI” as well.
And: Some people which take over this corporate ham-fistedness into personal behaviour might need to be informed about boundaries. This is good. We need to define and keep boundaries on that (such as the above policy of the Void Linux project).
But: you do not win this discussion by name-calling. Are you aware that the Linux community is also a target of trolling? Have you perhaps heard that polarizing topics (for example right now, gas prices, or migration) are absolutely used in a kind of information warfare to break communities and civil society? This topic is one of them.
i would rewrite the title as “Slopper tried to be a maintainer on void linux: abducted and orphaned 100 packages they maintained after being discovered and forced to comply”
To say that, you would need proof that this was in bad faith, wouldn’t you? I wrote this comment about polarization for a reason.
Schließlich wurde der Spitzenreiter bei dieser Sabotage ja auch erst mit 'nem Ministerposten belohnt…
Warte, was? Hör ich richtig? Der Typ mit den Silvesterraketen ist jetzt Minister?
Also, polarization is another danger, it can seriously hurt communities, and also can be used against them. So, PLEASE be careful about polarization and trolling, as trolls like to play on people’s emotions like a fiddle.
(Sadly, I saw that with some dance communities during COVID, which went into very personal and hurtful fights about adherence to social distancing rules, which had become a topic of information warfare.) “AI” is a polarizing topic, too, and for the FOSS community much more dangerous than the old humorous dispute whether Emacs or vim is better. We need to navigate between Scylla and Charybdis here, or possibly even avoid an ill-advised journey between them.
FOSS isn’t entirely immune to AI mania (or rather, LLM mania, because no ‘intelligence’ is inside).
I think LLMs can tentatively be used for some useful things, like checking for security bugs in new kernel code. But this does not answer the difficult question whether it should be used, because there are many important points in contra. Apart from massive pollution of the biosphere, it causes also a kind of pollution of collective knowledge and understanding. Which is a very important aspect of FOSS, and one of the things which bring us together.
For example, as Joey Hess wrote, if a distribution’s package build code is done by LLMs, it is likely to become harder to understand over time. This is probably not the kind of technical debt which a distribution with limited resources wants to have. And you see, the decisions of individuals affect other people too, which is why we have rules.
Die OP Webseite fasst einige Entwicklungen der letzten 50 Jahre zusammen. Der Wikipedia-Artikel die Entwicklung des wissenschaftlichen Forschungsstandes.
Die Einsicht, dass menschengemachter Klimawandel ein reales Problem ist, war 1992 schon recht weit.
Cover des SPIEGEL 1986:
They can’t go public.
I think that rising interest rates (e.g. by the ECB) because of more expensive oil and empty national reserves wouldn’t make that easier.
The Volkswagen Diesel emissions “scandal” has killed more people by air pollution than 9/11.
The people on the top did it just for more money.
It is still not polite to call that murder.
If you think hard about it…
in 100 years, by all experience the current wars will be so irrelevant that nobody will even bother to piss on the current warmongers graves. They will be mostly forgotten.
In 100 years, our today’s leaders inactivity on imminent climate destruction - and transitively, our collective inaction - will be daily cause for deep desperation and the darkest curses which childs of the human race have ever uttered. For what we know sufficiently, people will likely witness the disintegration of our current technical civilization. Because 3 degrees warming is way too much for a technical civilization to survive.
Maybe because of my lack of expertise in history, but I can´t imagine find any example in history of such epic stupidity. Remember that qualitatively, we know exactly what will happen.
What matters is looking at a file and being able to tell what was defined where and imported from there.
I have a LaTeX file from 1993 in my archive dir that I can format and print at a whim. It is a technical manua from an uni research hardware project written in Spanish, initially on an ULTRIX or DEC system, and I converted it once to ISO 8859-1 encoding and once to UTF-8.
Überwachung mithilfe chinesischer Technologien
Im Frühjahr 2023 fand das Regime eine effizientere Methode, um die Kopftuchpflicht durchzusetzen. Mithilfe chinesischer Technologie ließen die Machthaber einen umfassenden islamischen Überwachungsstaat errichten: Frauen, die sich ohne Hidschab zeigten, wurden durch Kameras mit Gesichtserkennung identifiziert und bekamen per SMS eine Verwarnung. Nach dem dritten Verstoß drohten Geldbußen, bis hin zu Haftstrafen und der Beschlagnahmung des Autos.
[…]
Im März dieses Jahres berichtete die Financial Times, dass der Mossad, Israels Geheimdienst, in jene Überwachungskameras, die zur Kontrolle der Bevölkerung eingesetzt wurden, eingedrungen war und auf diese Weise Bewegungsmuster hochrangiger Funktionäre und Militärs nachverfolgen konnte. So soll es dem israelischen Militär schließlich sogar gelungen sein, Irans Staatschef Ali Chamenei zu töten.
Zana Rahimi vermutet, dass in Regierungskreisen schon nach dem 12-Tage-Krieg der Verdacht aufkam, die Überwachungskameras könnten infiltriert sein. Tatsache ist, dass die iranische Regierung plötzlich auf ihre Nutzung verzichtete – auch das führte zu einer neu gewonnenen Kleidungsfreiheit.
Kann man sich echt nicht ausdenken.
Ich habe unendlichen Respekt vor diesen Frauen, die so viel Mumm haben.
Kleiner Tipp: Ölfördereinrichtungen sind auch sehr kapitalintensiv. Mittlerweile kapitalintensiver als Wind und Solar. Die Entwicklung zu hohen Zinsen - welche die aktuelle US Politik nur fördert - kann durchaus die Preise fossiler Energie weiter erhöhen, weil dann schon die Investitionen zu teuer werden. Und die sind nötig, weil alte Ölquellen im Lauf der Zeit immer weniger liefern.
Dazu kommt, dass für die Ölkonzerne wegen immer günstigerem Wind und Solar, Elektroautos und Wärmepumpen es sich immer weniger lohnt, langfristig, das heisst in Investitionszyklen von etwa 20 Jahren, in neue Förderkapazitäten zu investieren. Auch ds wird das Angebot verknappen.