I came across a Reddit post indicating that Jon Ringer, a significant contributor to the NixOS project, has been banned from GitHub. This raises some critical questions: Could this adversely impact the NixOS 24.05 release? What are the specific reasons behind the moderation team’s decision to ban Jon Ringer from GitHub? I think it’s safe to say that the broader community would be eager to get answers to these questions.
The way things are going, the nixos community’s going to be forked. If all you do is ask questions about nix itself on the nixos discourse, then things are fine. However if you step out line by suggesting change or voice your opinion against change that mods and foundation want, you’re going to get flamed into oblivion.
Jon is just one of the many examples.
The NixOS community is forked on a regular basis. So is the nixpkgs community. The focus here is on control of CppNix, e.g. blocking the autotools-to-meson PR.
It’s pretty easy to have opinions that the mods and Foundation don’t like. Be polite and you’ll be fine. Also, don’t be like Jon, who thinks “polite” means smiling through gritted teeth and being passive-aggressive.
Which nixos community forks are there? I’m not aware of any?
It’s pretty easy to have opinions that the mods and Foundation don’t like. Be polite and you’ll be fine.
It’s easy as long as you don’t voice them. If they disagree, then it’s the end of the discussion. They hold the power so whatever they don’t like won’t happen or your discussion will be moved to a new topic and unlisted. That does seem to happen fairly regularly.
Is this nonsense spreading? Stop trying to bring back forum signatures mixed with ‘I do not give Facebook permission, repost this before midnight.’ Legally, practically, and morally, it is incorrect.
If you could reserve those rights, they would be so by default.
Properly mangling information through a deep neural network is about as transformative as fair use gets. Doing it wrong and just storing data is a failure case. (And it suggests a lot of wasted effort, where that data could be referenced instead of trained. Ideally we could show the LLM a new textbook and have it explain by reading, rather than stirring the textbook into the zillion-dollar back-end process that created it.)
The loudest critics may not even know what they want. Guys: you expect the robot to answer specific questions about the US constitution and the characters in Harry Potter, while incapable of quoting from exactly one of them? Like it should mumble its way through paraphrasing “Yer a wizard… Barry,” but if it gets one word wrong in the second amendment then it’s useless. We finally created a machine that speaks English and people are mad it doesn’t immediately grasp copyright law. When most people don’t.
The way things are going, the nixos community’s going to be forked. If all you do is ask questions about nix itself on the nixos discourse, then things are fine. However if you step out line by suggesting change or voice your opinion against change that mods and foundation want, you’re going to get flamed into oblivion.
Jon is just one of the many examples.
Anti Commercial-AI license
The NixOS community is forked on a regular basis. So is the nixpkgs community. The focus here is on control of CppNix, e.g. blocking the autotools-to-meson PR.
It’s pretty easy to have opinions that the mods and Foundation don’t like. Be polite and you’ll be fine. Also, don’t be like Jon, who thinks “polite” means smiling through gritted teeth and being passive-aggressive.
Which nixos community forks are there? I’m not aware of any?
It’s easy as long as you don’t voice them. If they disagree, then it’s the end of the discussion. They hold the power so whatever they don’t like won’t happen or your discussion will be moved to a new topic and unlisted. That does seem to happen fairly regularly.
Anti Commercial-AI license
Is this nonsense spreading? Stop trying to bring back forum signatures mixed with ‘I do not give Facebook permission, repost this before midnight.’ Legally, practically, and morally, it is incorrect.
If you could reserve those rights, they would be so by default.
OpenAI et al. will just put “No copyright infringment intended” on everything and it will all be fine.
Honestly, that’d be equally valid.
Properly mangling information through a deep neural network is about as transformative as fair use gets. Doing it wrong and just storing data is a failure case. (And it suggests a lot of wasted effort, where that data could be referenced instead of trained. Ideally we could show the LLM a new textbook and have it explain by reading, rather than stirring the textbook into the zillion-dollar back-end process that created it.)
The loudest critics may not even know what they want. Guys: you expect the robot to answer specific questions about the US constitution and the characters in Harry Potter, while incapable of quoting from exactly one of them? Like it should mumble its way through paraphrasing “Yer a wizard… Barry,” but if it gets one word wrong in the second amendment then it’s useless. We finally created a machine that speaks English and people are mad it doesn’t immediately grasp copyright law. When most people don’t.