You can disagree with my opinion, but at least point to where the fashy-ness is in the original statement or their policy so I understand what you mean.
I think it's a matter of volume, it's extremely easy and quick to publish large amounts of generated code, and by far most people won't go searching your codebase in depth to see if the code is decent, if it works as advertised they don't have a reason to look into it further. If you add a third party to vet all code then you're still giving massive amounts of work to whoever has to review the mountains of slop.
It's not like we didn't have an issue like this before, about people copy pasting without understanding anything, but these tools made it more accessible and streamlined, and the worst part is that vibe coders believe sharing their slop is of value.
Part of it yeah, but the emancipation of women seems like a bigger factor, as women with less choices in poor families are more likely to have children despite the insane costs, and it isn't out of malice or misunderstanding either. And other factors are the stress and the general pessimism people have for the future, especially regarding climate change.
If you're in the global north I think it's very understandable to help local first, but as someone from the global south I'm very thankful for this nonetheless
That's pretty much where I'm at with this, whatever usefulness comes out from this kind pf tech will benefit professionals and end users so much more the more open it is.
Not to defend any comment, I have no horse in this race, but being rude to people doesn't usually help your point, and unless you're being rude back in the same thread no one will have enough context to give you benefit of the doubt
Sounds like another edition of fearmongering about China because of geopolitical reasons rather than evidence. The bit about digital sovereignty is really funny to me, outside of China and sanctioned countries we're all tied to US digital products whether we want to or not, but if the US want to remain the most powerful player there they can open source their own models and compete in the free market.
Adding to your comment, in social sciences it's also much harder not to be biased as the resources used in training will have been produced in accordance to the dominant ideology of the institution producing knowledge, so even if/when we agree with a bias (ex: liberalism) we need to remind ourselves to be critical if we want to understand and/or produce good science.
Yup. I wouldn't have hated it if they said they can't discriminate against customers as that'd require some surveillance and go counter to the project, but to still condemn nazis because it's appalling. But refusing to condemn nazis in the name of privacy is absurd. Do they think if nazis get in power they'll look back at this and let us have privacy?
More cynically they probably believe this is a market and as a business they need to increase their profits even if it means, as you said, becoming a nazi bar. But whether they see it or not, they're encouraging political forces that seek to destroy their whole business, so even cynically they should oppose this.
I was taught by my teachers years ago that it was great that I wouldn't have to pick up C thanks to higher level languages and I trusted them, and I regret it deeply. It took me years of curiosity and reading unrelated stuff to parse some stuff that would have probably taken so little time if I had simply started with C.
I ran debian testing for a while and I agree with this advice. I hadn't bothered to read that the debian website itself said testing isn't meant to be used like I was using it lol.
I think Debian stable is awesome and it's what I'm running atm, but for people who want or need newer packages I agree it'd be better to go with a rolling release or at least with a distribution that has a quicker release cycle (like Fedora).
It says there that he joined the industry when he was 17, which means after December 1969. So by late 60s he really means the 70s.