How on earth is taking a pro human stance for ethical reasons "fashy"?

They probably meant that they don't trust governments to implement policy like this well enough, but not sure.

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.

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.

Praise be Sekhmet!

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 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).

I'm maybe less optimistic but I agree we need to recognize that to some degree this tech is here to stay and we need to plan accordingly to reduce harm. Shaming people for their consumption only causes suffering. We need to grow more communities to be more resilient and help whoever we can.