Others might have better reasons, but they’ve just become too big for the health of the internet.

Enshittification isn’t optional for larger companies. They should not be put in a position of power where they could fuck us over.

The great thing is that the good internet is all still there.

They say every million in Microsoft ad spend is a quarter point in Linux desktop share.

Yeah I’m having conversations with the most broie business school types and finding out they’re running mint. I grew up not knowing anyone who used Linux except maybe at school.

Yeah I’m with you. I’m disappointed, but everyone will disappoint you in some way some times. Hell I’m disappointed in myself plenty of the time.

I agree, we try our best, but we’ve got to focus on the truly existential issues.

You don’t need animal products to live, but I don’t disagree with your point about food. At least it’s actually for people.

AI is only for extracting the last bit of marrow from the bones of workers before making them completely obsolete.

My complaint is at least before the individual stealing the idea and recombining it was the one getting paid.

Now that’s just a SaaS that benefits a handful of overvalued superscalers. They get to sit on their horde of data and charge for access.

The main problem with the output of LLMs is people not checking results, but there are ethical problems with the effective use of it too. Especially if you’re you’re dealing with the major platforms, who have shown no qualms allying themselves with fascist governments, surveillance capitalists, or just generally being cavalier about workers rights. (And obviously extracting value from the commons and renting it out on a scale never before seen, but that’s the obvious one.)

I would say the same thing about hosting services on AWS. The corporate world does it because it just makes financial sense, but all they care about is outputs. I expect better from individuals who are trying to send a message.

Never been more proud to be on the fediverse than when I saw the reaction to threads

In my experience if you start a niche community and tend to it then people will eventually come and start filling it. Not as much as on the mainstreams but still enough.

I feel like without something like reddit, capital would try to worm its way into places like this, which would be disastrous if it was successful.

I’d like to know what the objection of the collaborator who actioned that ban was

Yeah I was thinking of this as a half measure. But less secure than just wiping

Or maybe a lighter version of the duress pin that just loads the fake profile (or alternate profile) but leaves the other(s) intact.

If you’re just handing your phone over for a border pig to swipe through before waving you through that might be adequate.

The rule is for vibe coded projects. From the article:

If your work fits into these cases, it is unlikely that you are affected at all:

• Projects who have an active community that cares about and maintains the software
• Projects with a significant pre-LLM history
• Maintainers who unknowingly or willingly accepted LLM-generated contributions from other contributors, if your project otherwise does not involve the heavy use of LLMs

They don’t need a rule that can be run automatically because it’s a purely human operation that is trying to take a stand against the more pernicious effects of corporate LLMs.

Do you just disagree with this stance and are just trying to poke whatever hypothetical holes you can in their logic, or do you just want more rigorous definitions/rules?

From experience, content moderation works best when there is some flexibility in the rules, so people can talk it out and come to concessions together.

Like anyone who’s offended by this isn’t already slopping for Microsoft’s GitHub.

I use them as one of my mirrors for public projects, but host my own repos and CI now.

As in obvious. Like they have model instructions and bots credited as authors on commits.

Something extruded from an LLM?

Based