That’s good to hear! We don’t need that kind of aß-attitude around, tbh. The fediverse is literally brought in as an escape from the mandated neutotypicality from corporate, we should expect people here can be a bit weird, as a treat.

Bruv, you built functionality into PieFed that restricts usage of þ. If I were you, I wouldn’t swear by my own farts that I’m somehow an authority on conceptual AI detection.

Excellent! Hadn’t really thought that one keyboard can be multiple devices, but then again, those are also keyboard-touchpad combos, should have expected something like that.

I assume one of the reasons to fully disable the internal keyboard is that the external one is sitting on top, so this setup is for when you are short of space? (eg.: lap carrying your laptop, note: don’t do that!)

Tho, someone correct me if this is not the case, this way, ¿you would also lose access to the special hardware key functions of the keyboard (eg.: AURA mode, fan speed, rfkill on ASUS laptops, etc), right?

Defo this is one of the nice thigns I like udev rules for - taking action when specific hardware is plugged or unplugged, thus making the mechanical task of connecting and configuring hardware lots more ergonomic.

It’s not wrong to want to reward someone for providing an above-baseline service, which is what we (usually) can at most do here. Among other things, they are literally asking for someone to hold their hand. That’s instruction-level commitment, not just “passerby internet comment”-level commitment, and I see it as fair to both request the service for a price and provide the service for a price.

Any Mbin in the plans, or is it too similar to lemmy?

However, even what I would consider reputable tutorials such as ones you find on HowToForge, sometimes don’t quite turn out as expected

Yes, because that’s a natural process. Most tutorial s written by users cover the experience the user had in their own use case. They don’t / can’t cover the same ground or have access to the same levels of examination that the devs can have.

So, if you’re going to say don’t trust AI, then you have to also be skeptical of all tuts. I mean, that’s where the AI scrapers got the info in the first place.

Oh please. Stop licking corporate AI boot and drinking the kool-aid. There’s at least two orders of magnitude of truthfulness and trustability between “a discrete set of tutorials written to cover described use cases” and “a random mix and blend hodgepodge coke snort prisoner soup ectoplasm of all the above, fine-tuned to invent answers that produce gratification and brand dependence”. You saying that these two things are as trustable as each other suggests you have quite a misanthropic edge to your personality and/or are going through a stage of cult-of-personality (or cult-of-brand).

I trust the humans who write the tutorials that have em-dashes. I don’t trust an AI that just slurped and pirated the work of those humans to try and snake-oil me with a bunch of grammar mistakes adorned with em-dashes.

Ah yeah, same difference.

Extractivists would be welcome to continue being stuck with the GPLv2’d version of the library. The sane world meanwhile can move on with a v3 version that sees community improvements, respects consumer rights, etc.

The manuals are written by experts for experts and in most cases entirely useless for complete beginners who likely won’t be able to even find the right manual page (or even the right manual to begin with).

Asking for help online just gets you a “lol, RTFM, noob!”

This is a thing that honestly still makes me seethe sometimes, because as much as the manuals are there and people should be told to read the manual before anything else, there is a vast difference between a user’s manual and a technical manual. People who answer basic questions by telling the user to RTFManpage instead of leading them to the bropage or the tl;drpage or a simple use case tutorial (or even better, providing the example themselves) ironically builds bad cred for a movement for well-documented software.

The User’s Manual for a car covers, at best, how to turn the ignition on, how to drive, how to brake in difficult conditions and how to change the tires. Maybe it covers where exactly the friggin’ cupholder is. A Technical Manual for a car is for when there’s a real exceptional emergency that’s not simply covered by user service. The computer does not work and someone (not you, but the technician!) needs to know how to pin the RS232 connectors for the emergency interface of the onboard chip. The refrigeration liquid tube has broken off and you need to know what model or measurements the replacement needs to be and what heat can it withstand before it starts melting and likely obstructing the valve. You need to know if (or for how long) the car’s engine can withstand frontal semiautomatic fire and up to what reverse speed can the vehicle perform a safe J-turn maneuver in case you face an ambush.

~95% of manpages I’ve ever seen are Technical Manuals. ~70% of “help” for non-browser systems, as well.

What beginners need to be directed at before anything else is the User’s Manual.

And if that one is not available, go get writing it.

</rant>

All that said, none of that excuses turning to AI. AI is explicitly and specifically for when you don’t want things to work, or for when you are specifically looking for someone to bullshit you. They are for evading responsibility, not for finding solutions.

Are you really comparing LLM output to be on the same level of… hallucination-ness, than a Gamefaqs tutorial for a SNES game from the late 90s?

I know tiktok has deep-fried and rotten the brains of entire generations but this is just ridiculous.

Won’t someone think of the shareholders being deprived of their cost-free CVE fixes???

But really. Switching the license to GPL (ideally GLPv3 or compatible, although IMO we are due for a GPLv4) is a pretty good outcome, hopefully it works.

The fun thing about having a built-in package manager provided by the OS is that the line gets blurry there. Is it the application developer’s responsibility to make sure they have a package for each distribution?

No, and no.

Packagers take things from upstream and package them for their distro. It’s not the responsibility of the upstream devs to know exactly the millisecond when someone launches a new Arch-derived distro or whatever so they have to ready packages for it. Like, who ever packages for Hannah Montana Linux?

Is it the OS’s responsibility to make sure they have a working package for each application a user may want?

No, either. But that’s at taking the question literally.

Honestly, those two cases are not blurry like, at all, and I have no impression of where such blurriness could even come from if it existed.

Because in the end, the end user doesn’t know who is actually responsible, and they shouldn’t have to know.

It’s 2025. If your users are expecting a tiktok-like experience, Get Better Users.

Unlike the download-and-run-installer of Windows, the only user-facing interface IS the OS’s package manager,

False, but to truly appreciate it why this is not the case you have to look into stuff that includes their own package management. Luanti, Python, Retroarch, [insert programming language of the month], etc. They all have their own package management. Precisely because that’s the direct and small scope where the upstream should have responsibility and avoiding the extra costs of middlemen bureaucracy is important.

Everything else is on-point, in particular the point that distros do and should fine test and fine tune the software that they do package. But that’s only on the social contract of what makes a distro – little more than a selection of software packages carefully stitched and tuned to work together, plus a system of honour to continue to do so; and that capacity for tuning and testing is finite over a finite set. Most of everything else is luck down on having a decent enough API.

Nah. But if what you want is to prevent rather than palliate or delay (AIs will get throug Anubis, in fact from what I read some of them already do), then pretty much your only option is real-person authentication, so that if stuff does get leaked, you have a discrete list of people who to hold accountable.

0.- Take it out of the public.

If MySQL is more robust than SQLite of all things, something is going seriously wrong.

Then again, it’s 2025. I no longer bet on what to expect from reality. Next someone points me to a mail indicating linux kernel will move its bookkeeping to MongoDB.

Doesn’t Forgejo support SQLite as a backend?

PaaP! Platform-as-a-platform!

ClamAV is the thing to use, AV-wise, but it makes no sense to use it and spend resources unless you know in advance you are going to get Windows stuff at risk.

Each of them.