From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
Górny took issue with everything from the energy consumption driven by AI
This has to be a joke. The team behind a distro that compiles everything from scratch all the time is concerned about wasting power now? The only distro for which I ever setup a compile cluster?
Give me a break. This is the new luddite movement.
Gotta say your comment makes an insightful impression, however Gentoo compilations are peanuts compared to the massive energy sucking hype that A.I. is. I am glad that people speak out publicly against this insane madness. A.I. hyping during climate crisis ? Overwhelming sales of SUVs Plans to move to planet Mars Who would have guessed that years ago ?
Well it's the training of LLMs that consumes so much energy, simply using them (for say software development purposes) (inference) probably takes less power than recompiling your Gentoo.
Nobody can argue that ChromeOS (gentoo) Is the fastest and lightest and more polished distro available, though
You really went looking for something to hate on there didn't you. That is the only sentence in the whole article that even mentions power consumption, all the other arguments both fit and against are for a variety of other topics.
It seems to be that you are more likely caught up in some kind of movement if one argument from one person is enough for you to label everyone there luddites
If being a luddite means keeping man in the loop so be it.
The original Luddite movement was literally a worker's rights movement, and the "irrationally afraid of technology" characterization was manufactured by the ruling class, so yes. The Luddites were right then and they're right now too.
The only problem the Luddites had is they went and busted the machines instead of the rich owners' kneecaps.
If you say, "they did that too!" Well, NOT ENOUGH!!
instead
I'd rather they do both.
There was an episode of Cool People Who Did Cool Stuff that covered the luddites, I had no idea beforehand what they actually stood for, fascinating stuff
As someone who regularly saves time by automating, I can’t get on board for a movement which directly opposes process improvement by improving efficiency.
They're not, they're opposing a process that leads to garbage output and horrible systemic efficiency.
Luddites objected primarily to the rising popularity of automated textile equipment, threatening the jobs and livelihoods of skilled workers as this technology allowed them to be replaced by cheaper and less skilled workers.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite
I’ve also read a book on the subject of Luddites and it was clear to me that it was a response to higher efficiency machinery replacing the need for a good portion of their jobs.
This led to mass starvation as the workers no longer could feed themselves and no industry replaced the lost work. The textiles produced were of lower quality too, and sold for less which harmed the local economy leading to a rise in food prices along with the lower wages. Since the vast majority of arable land was used for cotton too no local food could lower the prices. Many people died as the luddites predicted.
There was mass starvation
They were right. This is not "anti-automation" this is against lower wages, mass unemployment, and an economic decrease. The automation was the cause of this, yes, but the concept of automation was not the issue. The issue was it's use here.
If the workers were provided an alternative job, if there was some plan to avoid starvation, and if the textiles were of a reasonable quality then there would be no issue.
History proved the luddites correct
The Luddites lost, but you should read the rest of this wiki article to learn how that happened, and consider again which side you're on.
To a certain extent other distros rely on more obscure distros like gentoo which uses package compilation as the default. If upstream are not publishing code which can be reproducibly built then the gentoo maintainers are the first to know and can raise an issue.
Also I think nobody so far weighed the energy consumption of e.g. using copilot against the environmental footprint of a human doing the legwork manually
Well I'm a Luddite (and so can you!) https://thenib.com/im-a-luddite/
More luddites please.
Ah, thanks for that link! I actually read the first few pages on the latest MIT Tech Review some days ago, thought I'd ready the rest and forgot, now I can.
How would they determine what is AI generated and what is not?
Every tenth line of code needs a comment break for a detailed ascii “drawing” of human hands
This is just a normal fist! I don't see anything wrong with it!
_______
---' ____)____
______)
______)
_______)
_______)
_______)
---.__________)
I don't think that this is a hard rule. They probably look for the same signs that we do - plausible sounding utter gibberish. They just don't want the drop in quality due to that. If an author creates content with AI, but takes their time to edit and improve it, I think that the Gentoo team may give it a pass.
Banned.
When you write a copyright notice you aught to specify which code is actually copyrighted and which is AI written? Guess you can just include the code and pretend you wrote it, or just omit which part is actually the non-copyrighted AI code.
Chat-GPT seems to have some issues with excessive amount of code
If you can tell the contribution is ai generated, it's not good enough
Thank you Gentoo Linux for this.
Might as well ban stack overflow based contributions as well.
AI is a great tool for coding. As long as it's used responsibly. Like any other tool, really.
But how would they know? It's like Blade Runner.
Lots of companies will do this, eventually advertising the purity and the size of their human created training data.
These will be the companies selling their content to AI companies, although some will probably just be scanned in illegally. Perhaps a new type of copy write lawsuit will have to be invented.
Most people will continue to use these sites, aware their data is being used like this.
One fear they mentioned is that they may get into legal trouble in the future because tools like Copilot use copyrighted content.
In that case, even if this policy is not practically enforceable, it could maybe serve them if they do end up in court. IANAL