Hello, tone-policing genocide-defender and/or carnist 👋
Instead of being mad about words, maybe you should think about why the words bother you more than the injustice they describe.
Have a day!
You’re conflating game engines being open source with the games themselves being proprietary. Proprietary products can use (some) open source things, but it doesnt make the end product open source.
Given that LLMs literally need the training data to be worth anything, releasing the final model without training data is not open source.
I love my Steam Deck, but I can barely play most games on low settings and I get like 40-50 FPS with a 90Hz screen.
We need more powerful hardware. I’d prefer that it comes from Valve, but I’ll take what I can get, as long as it’s optimized for SteamOS/Linux.
I disagree with this characterization of Linux devs. They’re just people. I’m sure there are some shitheads out there, but I don’t think it’s anymore the case than with any other sample of software devs.
I think the more likely reason that accessibility technology is an afterthought in Linux is because it’s an afterthought in pretty much all software, which is a bad thing, but I haven’t seen them be elitist about accessibility.
Some of the problem really is just that Linux graphical capabilities have been challenging enough enough that doing some of the extra demanding things that various access capabilities require weren’t possible until recently (and some of them still aren’t possible).
You are an absolute 🤡 to conflate communism, a liberatory ideology, with being “a mass murderer fan club”. As an anarchist, I certainly wouldn’t trust your usage of the term “anarchist”. lmao.
Yeah. I’m sad to say that, about a year ago, I switched back to macOS because it handles accessibility waaaaay better. And I don’t even use screen readers. It sounds like their situation is even worse :/
I just need the ability to easily zoom in and out using Super+scroll up/down (without causing performance issues or visual jank) and trackpad gestures that aren’t extremely limited. Granted, both of these things may be more of a DE thing, but wherever the issue lies, I would like them fixed.
I just hope Wayland has its accessibility shit together before then. There are people that still need to use X11 for their accessibility needs.
this platform is a mass murderer fanclub
lmao. Elaborate.
Helix is best editor 😏
My use of the word “stealing” is not a condemnation, so substitute it with “borrowing” or “using” if you want. It was already stolen by other tech oligarchs.
You can call the algo open source if the code is available under an OSS license. But the larger project still uses proprietary training data, and therefor the whole model, which requires proprietary training data to function is not open source.
I mean, god bless 'em for stealing already-stolen data from scumfuck tech oligarchs and causing a muti-billion dollar devaluation in the AI bubble. If people could just stop laundering the term “open source”, that’d be great.
You won’t see me on the side of the “debate” that launders language in defense of the owning class ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Yes. That solution would be to not lie about it by calling something that isn’t open source “open source”.
That’s fine if you think the algorithm is the most important thing. I think the training data is equally important, and I’m so frustrated by the bastardization of the meaning of “open source” as it’s applied to LLMs.
It’s like if a normal software product provides a thin wrapper over a proprietary library that you must link against calling their project open source. The wrapper is open, but the actual substance of what provides the functionality isn’t.
It’d be fine if we could just use more honest language like “open weight”, but “open source” means something different.
The training data is the important piece, and if that’s not open, then it’s not open source.
I don’t want the data to avoid using the official one. I want the data so that so that I can reproduce the model. Without the training data, you can’t reproduce the model, and if you can’t do that, it’s not open source.
The idea that a normal person can scrape the same amount and quality of data that any company or government can, and tune the weights enough to recreate the model is absurd.
I’m not seeing the training data here… so it looks like the answer is yes, it’s not actually open source.
Mental Outlaw is a reich-wing freak, so that’s par for the course. Unfortunately, there are a fair amount of these shitheads in the Linux YouTube space.
Is it actually open source, or are we using the fake definition of “open source AI” that the OSI has massaged into being so corpo-friendly that the training data itself can be kept a secret?
Nice!
Well, my favorite is Helix – a text editor. But it’s a TUI in the same way that vim is a TUI, and being that it’s a text editor, you’re likely to have very strong opinions about whatever your current favorite editor is. Which is totally fine. I’m not looking to start any editor wars.
Here are some others:
I use way more than just those. If you do find that some TUIs may be useful, there are a bunch more here. If not, I’m still interested in what behaviors you find off-putting about TUIs. Maybe I can incorporate that feedback for TUIs that I write :)
That’s fine. I’m sure there are some sub-par TUIs out there. I’ve seen pretty great TUIs, especially the ones written in Rust (because of the excellent TUI lib they have).
GUIs are fine too (as long as they don’t use Electron lol).
They literally did exactly that. Show me the training data. If it has been provided under an open source license, then I’ll revise my statement.
You literally cannot create a useful LLM without the training data. That is a part of the framework used to create the model, and they kept that proprietary. It is a part of the source. This is such an obvious point that I should not have to state it.