I wouldn’t mind moderating

Thanks! It would be nice if some user(s) of debian itself would do it also but this is a start :)

Given how much worse Ubuntu has gotten in recent years maybe you’ll find yourself switching to Debian soon enough anyway 😉

imo posts about lesser-known debian derivatives should be allowed here… but as i said earlier either the poster or a 3rd party source they’re linking to should make a good case for why it is actually interesting and/or credible.

here is the email this screenshot is an excerpt of; the specific “X” (the thing which the message Linus is replying to here suggested perhaps AI should not be used for) was the writing of commit messages.

This is bizarre. Lindows rightfully died long ago; this claims to be a community project to restart it?

And, they say they’re based on Debian 13 (trixie) but also they have an i386 ISO somehow? 🤨

As wikipedia explains:

Debian directs users to keep i386 systems on Debian 12 or retiring the system in question, as the remaining packages are intended for running 32-bit x86 software on 64-bit systems and require the SSE2 CPU instruction set that most 32-bit x86 CPUs don’t support.

I’m pretty sure this is some kind of scam, which makes me even more suspicious of the other distros-i-never-heard-of which OP recently posted. I’m inclined to delete it but I’ll first ask you OP: have you actually tried this? why did you post it? what about the other distros you’ve posted to /c/debian today?

(given your account’s long history i’m assuming good faith for the moment but I am very tempted to delete everything you’ve posted here today… so please explain)

or we could just consider time as officially ended

i used https://marshdeer.github.io/xkcd2501-generator/ to remake it:

(posted here in !linuxmemes@lemmy.world)

for people wondering what “folios” in Linux memory management are: https://lwn.net/Articles/937239/

On href, I think all 3: style.css, /style.css, ./style.css point to the same place.

Are Anti-AI Linux distributions practical?

It’s not possible to have a 100% no-LLM-coding-involved Linux distro anymore now that the kernel itself is welcoming LLM-assisted contributions, but it’s still possible to say that everything which the distro produces itself will not use AI.

How can AI commits be responsible?

What Debian means is: by reading what it produces and not just blindly accepting it but having humans review it carefully. The quality of LLM-assisted software is highly variable. Experienced people like Debian and Linux kernel developers are much less likely to publish very bad slop than inexperienced developers who are newly able to make a thing work well enough to ship it.

I am concerned about the extent of Debian’s embrace of LLMs but I still have a lot more confidence in them than most other distros (especially small hardcore-anti-AI distro projects lacking sufficient developer capacity to even keep up with security updates).

I expect we’ll be seeing lots more things like this non-upstreamable-because-AI hardware enablement and distros like Nura (formerly postmarketOS) will either either adopt more nuanced LLM policies or be forked.

I am doubtful about if there will be any serious distros with hard LLM bans in a few years from now. But also, perhaps the bubble will have burst by then, so hosted inference won’t be so cheap and the use of LLMs will probably be quite different.

the primary reason is AI is a thief

This is not the primary reason for most people, I don’t think. I think the fact that it increases complexity while reducing human understanding is the biggest problem; it’s possible (easy even) now to produce mountains of good-enough-by-many-metrics source code which the person doing the prompting has very little comprehension of. The fact that it is also a plagiarism machine is far less of a problem than this. (There are a litany of other problems too of course, several others of which I would also rate as worse than the plagiarism aspect.)

Arch doesn’t seem to have an ARM version

it’s “unofficial” but arch has had an arm port for years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arch_Linux_ARM / https://archlinuxarm.org/

where is the source code?

Steam has a bunch of code on the page you linked, including some Steam Frame-specific code. Note however that SteamOS is not an entirely free software (open source) operating system; it contains lots of free/libre software but also contains some proprietary parts. They are only required to ship source code for the copyleft-licensed components in it; nothing requires them to actually distribute a complete working distribution for hardware they don’t want to. And, it appears that in the case of their ARM port, they do not currently distribute an image for anything besides their Frame device.

I wonder why they are doing that that 🤔

For people browsing from non-US IPs who want to read the paper, it’s archived here: https://web.archive.org/web/20260928181926/https://flocksurveillance.org/docs/formal-research-paper.pdf

state of illinoise

Okay but which parts are edited and which are real?

i don’t know which if any parts of the image are real; a quick search shows it’s a popular new meme format where the part that varies is the offending prompt.

Anthropic banning people for “abusive or cruel behavior” to “mitigate risks to model welfare” is apparently a real thing, though.

this BBC article “Trump’s AI rebrand causes ‘unprecedented’ demand for Slovenian website names” notes that it was updated after publishing to stop implying that domain squatting is an illegitimate business 🤡

your system is blocking a public university’s website and describing it as malicious – you have more immediate problems to fix.

you have it backwards - that is the website blocking anonymous proxies (such as tor, which they said they’re using) from accessing the site.

As you can see, it says nothing about researching, troubleshooting, reverse-engineering, etc. As long as you write and understand the code yourself AI is allowed for everything else. As long as you’re not using generative AI it’s fine.

I’m not sure if you’re joking or legitimately confused, but, assuming the latter, fyi the “AI” that people use for “researching, troubleshooting, reverse-engineering, etc” is part of what is called “generative AI”. Given this, it’s not much a stretch to read it as saying that even posting in Nura forums about the existence of @sv1sjp@lemmy.world’s github repo would actually be a violation of Nura’s policy (as of today; I expect it will evolve in the not-too-distant future).

Nura will not accept generated patches, by the way.

If you click OP’s github link and scroll down you’ll find this section which acknowledges that: https://github.com/sv1sjp/mi-max2-oxygen-msm8953-nura-drivers#about-ai-assistance-and-contributing-upstream

The drivers, patches, scripts and write-ups here were produced in collaboration with an AI assistant and tested on a real Mi Max 2 (oxygen).

The Nura project does not accept LLM-generated contributions. One of its maintainers explains the reasons in this post: the social and environmental cost of these models, and the risk that people use them to produce private knowledge instead of joining and strengthening the community whose work the models learned from. We respect that decision. So:

• This repository is not a contribution to Nura or pmaports, and its code should not be submitted there as it is.
• It is public documentation, not private notes. The reusable part is the knowledge: how the hardware is wired, register addresses and meanings, root causes, what was tried and ruled out, and how to test safely. These are facts anyone can check on their own device. It can save time for anyone who wants to understand what works and what does not, and then write their own code to submit upstream.
• If you want to get this into Nura or upstream, learn from it, verify it on your hardware and write your own implementation, following the rules of the project you contribute to (Nura, the Linux kernel and libcamera each have their own contribution policies).
• Please engage with the community. The Nura wiki, the msm8953-mainline project and the people credited below did the groundwork this builds on.

@OP (@sv1sjp@lemmy.world) what isn’t clear to me is why you don’t try to upstream the kernel parts, since Linux is accepting LLM-assisted contributions (as is Nura actually, just only indirectly after their upstreams like Linux accept them).

You can see some examples here

oh i see, that one doesn’t have a microphone but rather three microphones 🤯

(previously via hackaday i saw someone turn a disposable vape into a webserver but the use of microphones in them is news to me, thanks)

microphones?

I believe comma is more widespread per country

it looks like you might be right… I’m surprised to learn that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_separator#Conventions_worldwide lists 83 countries who use comma as decimal separator, and only 59 who use dot (and presumably the thousands separator is usually the opposite of the decimal separator). However there are enough countries which aren’t on either list that it isn’t entirely clear from that page which convention is actually used in more countries.

Also, it’s much more complicated than the . vs , binary… among other oddities:

• Historically, in Germany and Austria, thousands separators were occasionally denoted by alternating uses of commas and points, e.g. “1.234,567.890,12” (or “1.234,567.890·12” in Austria-Hungary and Austria prior to 1938) for “eine Milliarde 234 Millionen …”, but this is not seen today and contemporary German readers would require an explanation to understand it.
• In Switzerland, there are two styles. Currency values use an apostrophe (') as a thousands separator along with a dot (.) as the decimal separator, like “1’234’567.89”. For other values, the SI-style “1 234 567,89” is used, with a comma (,) as the decimal separator. The apostrophe is also the most common thousands separator for non-currency values, like “1’234’567,89”.

Yes, probably not all but certainly most bugs being found now are.