Imagine taking the lightweight, privacy-focused appeal of Linux and completely ruining it by hardwiring AI models straight into the OS. Nobody is switching from Windows for more forced AI features.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 17 points 14 hours ago (19 children)

While that is true, we don't have to accept more slop! There are other kernels that exist which actually follow better practices. We can have microkernels, we can and should reject more slop in Linux. I don't want it to turn into Windows! I will learn how to make my own operating system if need be. ROFL I am learning Python and C proper, so the ability will come to me soon.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 13 hours ago* (1 child)

    I will learn how to make my own operating system if need be. ROFL I am learning Python and C proper, so the ability will come to me soon.

    Akakichi no Eleven Redraws

    All the best

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 9 hours ago (5 children)

    I will learn how to make my own operating system if need be. ROFL I am learning Python and C proper, so the ability will come to me soon.

    Oh boy, new TempleOS incoming!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 hours ago (2 children)

    I am neither schizophrenic, particularly religious, or paranoid enough to make a TempleOS. That poor dude, may he rest in peace, nobody recognized the signs, they just egged him on and causing him to spiral further.

    The theme of this yet to be OS will likely be: What if retro aesthetics met modern, hennies?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 hours ago (1 child)

    In all seriousness, GNU has been around since the 1980s and it still didn't have a kernel until 2015. It's still not considered production ready. And that was with a whole team of people working on it. I'm not sure you've fully grasped what a massive undertaking coding your own OS would be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • There are people who have done it, creating something but...I don't think it will be easy at all in the slightest. I have looked at it. It seems rather scary to be honest but I don't want to just be complacent and accept bullshit when I don't have to. So what else is a guy to do in these troubling times? I imagine once I get certified in both Python and C, I will have come to my senses and just installed Gentoo like a sane person and adapt it to accept a Custom Kernel. As Gentoo is just a pile of tools that is used to build your OS.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (10 children)

    To me, AI is a tool like any other. The output turns out sloppy if the human wielding the tool it isn’t doing their job properly. Quality control is a responsibility that never went away.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 13 hours ago (4 children)

    And just like a tool, it can be too dull, too sharp, or just wrong for the job.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (3 children)

    Oh, absolutely. The person wielding it needs to know what they’re doing. You don’t hammer nails with a screwdriver unless you’re a total masochist. IMO current LLMs are ideal for generating the filler for self-help books. You have like 10 pages worth of ideas to say, but the publisher demands a 250-page book.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

    IMO current LLMs are ideal for generating the filler for self-help books. You have like 10 pages worth of ideas to say, but the publisher demands a 250-page book.

    lol okay. For a second there, with that previous comment you made, you made me think you actually thought LLMs were good for coding.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 child)

    Well, it depends. Mostly, I’m against it, but there are ways to vibe code responsibly. My requirements are very high. I don’t think most people vibe that way, hence the slop code you see out in the wild. If you’re using an LLM to write your code, I expect you to read and understand every line thoroughly. The programmer should be prepared to answer tough questions about any part of the code as if they wrote all of it.

    If you actually take the time to do that, you’ll either request a few more iterations of updates or fix it yourself. In reality though, people can’t be bothered to do it properly, and in that context vibe coding should be banned.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 hours ago

    I just think I wouldn't be able to be proud of my work anymore. I wouldn't feel good signing off on generated stuff. It's not my work.

    It's like generating a poster for a movie or something. Taking credit for that is just scummy, you know? I know people don't think anyone writes their own code anymore, professionally...

    ... but I would know. It would bother me.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 12 hours ago* (3 children)

    First of all, no it's not. A hammer is a tool. There's only one person responsible for taking it and making it useful: you. The fire department is not a tool. It performs a useful function which you can initiate, but it requires a complex chain of logistics which involves large amounts of resources and specially trained humans at every step to continue functioning. AI is a service.

    Second of all, even if we accept that it is a tool, a jackhammer that has a specialized tip made from a rare material mined almost exclusively using slave labor which needs regular replacement and which runs exclusively on a smelly gasoline engine which everyone around you then has to breathe is not a tool "like any other" and using it is not a neutral act. When you use Claude, you are giving money and support to a company that buys, scans, and then shreds physical copies of rare books; scrapes independent websites until their servers give out, actively circumvents webmasters' attempts to block them, and then lies about respecting opt-out signals; builds datacenters in disadvantaged areas that do everything from raising power bills and making power service less reliable for nearby residents to raising the temperature of places up to a mile away and producing inaudible infrasound that causes everything from irritability through hearing loss to siezures; powers those datacenters in part using natural gas turbines that produce significantly less electricity and more pollution than the same amount of natural gas in a natural gas power plant; and sells their technology to militaries which use them to design guided bombs.

    And that's before we even get started on what every single study on the cognitive effects of prolonged LLM use, even by trained professionals automating things they can do themselves, has revealed (in a sentence, use that muscle or lose it).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

    Fair enough. In a broader sense, all of that is true. The current implementation and business practices are completely rotten to the core. That’s why I’m not going to pay any company for AI, unless they publish a report about using renewable energy. Mistral AI is pretty transparent about their emissions, and that’s a step in the right direction. Still not good enough until they actually power their data centres with renewable energy.

    Anyway, I was mainly talking about LLMs specifically, not the entire AI industry and their destructive habits. None of the current AI companies deserve any of my money, especially the American ones.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 child)

    First of all, not giving them money is like pirating a Harry Potter show and then posting about how much you liked it on social media. You're still giving it free advertising to people who will spend money on it.

    Second of all, see what I said about the cognitive effects. If you don't practice doing things without the AI, you will lose the ability to do them much more quickly than you think you will, and if you start relying on it to make tiny decisions, at best your work and at worst your thinking will slowly start to reflect the model's biases.

    More importantly, programmers who use LLMs to complete programming tasks demonstrate less complete understanding of their code, which is important because eventually you need to maintain it and even LLMs' most ardent defenders admit that all of them are dogshit at software engineering. If you use AI to maintain an AI codebase, you'll do great for a couple of months before it loses the ability to remember all the parts and starts duplicating work and not syncing up state with other components and before long it's a buggy unmaintainable mess.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 hours ago

    Those scenarios are very realistic, and I think many people will suffer from these problems. I don’t expect that people will use LLMs responsibly. If they did, many of these problems could be mitigated, but obviously that’s not going to happen.

    It’s basically very similar to what happened to physical health when work was done by machines instead of muscles. Nowadays, people don’t carry hay bales or buckets of water, and it shows. Undoubtedly, the same thing will happen to the mind as people rely on LLMs to do the thinking for them. As a bonus, you’ll get voters who are even more ignorant than they currently are. What could go wrong with democracy at that point… Mussolini showed how to decommission the whole system through democratic means.

  • source
  • parent
  • "AI" is not just another tool to me, it is a political and economic effort to disenfranchise the skilled, for example by scraping countless sites and doing their best to launder the data. In this way they will be channeling skill in to their own hands, while channeling wealth out of the hands of those who are skilled. Sam Altman already said that the goal is turning intelligence into a utility like water or power, to make the masses dependent on them to source information. To do anything complex technologically. That doesn't seem much like just a simple tool to me. By design, in order to boost engagement with chatbots, the empty and hollow interactions have a parasocial quality...On the surface seeming polite and helpful (but software can never feel sad, happy, horny, or make decisions so there is just dead air on the other side). That can get people to engage with it for countless hours, isolate them from real people, put them into a state of psychosis even. Does that seem like just a mere tool to you?

    Aside from some of those major concerns, it even hurts the environment, people's understanding of code (which is intentional by the way), has caused massive economic consequences when people are lain off because CEOs are so delusionally into LLMs in the workplace thinking it will be the god that can print them everlasting profits. However, the use of so called AI, will just increase the technical debt, make code unmaintainable, cause problems that nobody can fix because they don't understand their own code anymore (because they were forced to engage with the things and just full send absolute nonsense without editing). You can think what you like, but I don't trust LLMs or the source of them. It's just very sus to me, I won't ever use them. As you never talk to software, not even once.

  • source
  • parent