We’re all eating from the same trough full of the same swine droppings, that sickness is everywhere. Take care of your people first neighbor, just remember that you have friends everywhere.

Look to the midterms to see how Hungary we are and I’ll, hopefully, see you at the BBQ.

I’m not sure what this website is adding here.

It looks like it and all of the linked websites were created in 2015-2017 and never updated.

Look at the “Notable bugs and security issues” list. It’s a bunch of things from 2015-2017 which are resolved/closed/merged PRs.

Or linked websites which consists of such well though out pages as: “Things that are good about Systemd - It starts services ig” & “Things that are bad about Systemd - *everything*”

I can’t imagine how much information or insight there is to be gained from a website that is out of date by over a decade.

You could still pull ahead by Friday!

I remember reading another article that said that their incinerated sewage waste had more gold per ton than their highest yielding mines.

Full name: girl

“Well, obviously I’m just going to make something up”

Age:

“THIS IS THE END OF THE WORLD”

smh, OP not knowing the difference between * and ?

You only need programs if you’re unhappy with the current state of your life. Delete computer, become enlightened.

That may be what you were talking about, but you replied to me and I was not having a conversation about Linux.

I know, I asked myself.

Researchers: “Not my department”

I’m not talking about Linux.

The context of my reply is about LLM generated code and the downstream use of it in a product.

See:

LLMs themselves being products of copyright isnt the legal question at issue, it’s the downstream use of that product.

Assuming that the code is 100% LLM generated and uncopyrightable does not affect the ability to enforce license restrictions created via End User Licensing on downstream uses of that product.

A piece of software that is unable to be copyrighted due to being 100% generated can be licensed and can expect to have that license enforced via contract law.

Well, that isn’t the case now and isn’t likely to be the case anytime in the near future.

The rules are not written in stone and future Linus will have a better idea of the capabilities of future AI and can change the rules accordingly, as he has done since the beginning, in order to steer the Linux project in the right direction.

Welcome Linux newbie :)

There can be secrets in .config and so you need to be deliberate about what you commit while also ensuring that your .gitignore file is properly filled out to exclude the files which would have secrets that you don’t want to be portable. This requires a bit of work and you will, in the process, learn about how every single application that you use stores its config. You typically don’t want to just git add ., though this is a lazy/simple option and can be acceptable if you keep your files and backups secured.

This kind of configuration will also encourage you to not just hit the ‘install plasma-apps metapackage’ button and be more deliberate about the software that you install as you will need to individually address the .config files for each application in your settings repo.

I’d recommend against using Github. First, remember that “the cloud” is just “someone else’s computer”. Trusting anybody (esp. Microsoft) with critical data is a bad idea. So, sync to a location where you create your good, secure primary backups. The kind you put on a disk in a safe deposit box.

This is undoubtedly more work than simply re-configuring everything when you fresh install. The payoff is that your system’s configuration will be portable and as consistent as possible across all environments and you can safely try new configurations with the trust that you can use git to revert any changes in case you don’t like them/it breaks something.

If you want to do even more work you can maintain a separate set of dotfiles for your desktop machines and the machines where you only interact via terminal. Things like tmux config/plugins, bash/zshrc files, useful scripts and the contents of .local/bin (which is where your user’s executable scripts primarily reside) so you can ensure that your remote environments are consistent and equably capable.

For more reading/search/youtubing on the topic, these kinds of repos are commonly referred to as ‘dotfiles’ or ‘dots’. You will often find people who customize applications that share their dots (more common in the ricing community). Some projects are essentially glorified dotfiles (NVChad for nvim, for example).

Additionally, if you have more complicated setups that need to drop files into system directories or just in multiple unrelated directories, you can add GNU Stow which basically lets you store all of your dotfiles, binaries, system configurations, etc in a single directory (which you make a git repo) and you configure GNU Stow with the locations where these files need to live and it puts the files there, via symlink with a single command. Stow is an added level of complexity, likely more than most people need, but if you interact with a lot of new machines and need a quick way to configure them all in as much depth as possible… this is one of the ways you can do it.

I’d hold off on the red hat for a little while given the state of things.

Tier 1 support exists to encourage you to finish your education so you can get a job that lets you create problems for Tier 1 support.

I’m not lazy I’m, uhh, mitigating supply chain attacks.

It doesn’t have to be open source.

If someone 100% generates code to make software then the software isn’t protected by copyright.

That software could be distributed and licensed under an EULA and the fact that it isn’t protected by copyright means absolutely nothing as far as the EULA is concerned.

The copyright status and the ability to license a piece of software under contract law do not depend on one another.

The short answer is that this is a slippery slope argument.

The long answer is:

In this hypothetical future where 95% of the Linux kernel is AI generated, it stands to reason that generating an OS kernel is possible (by definition of the hypothetical).

If generating a full OS kernel is possible then people could generate a fully closed source kernel without using any of the 5% of GPL protected code in the Linux kernel.

If you allow that it’s possible for AI to create a kernel with AI generated code then it will happen regardless of the status of the Linux kernel’s copyright protections.

Well, cynically, the Supreme Court will decide and Team AI has more money to buy RVs and luxury vacations.