Unlurker|Replay|About
Linux from Scratch (linuxfromscratch.org)
•
I kept an LFS system going for a few months (on a wretchedly awful by modern standards celeron “net top”) until eventually making a mess I couldn’t figure out how to untangle during a system upgrade. this gave me the sheer force of will necessary to later do things like own the multiplatform build system for an ocaml based distributed system (mina)
•
Didn't do it for a while, I would benefit from a little refresh. Is there a Web version running in a VM/container in the browser?
•
Confirmed Linux user with the good ol 2000 web style. Great job!
The best way to learn linux !
•
I do LFS every year, just to keep the chops sharp. It has been an immensely invaluable means of keeping informed with the way things are rolling in the Linux world.
LFS takes the wrong approach in my opinion. I did it once manually over a couple of days. I suppose I hoped enduring the pain of waiting for the packages to compile would somehow make me smarter. It didn’t. I didn’t learn much. It was like following a baking recipe. I know I need to add eggs and sugar in the ratio it says but I’d be damned if I could tell you why that specific ratio works. It’s just too much to take in at once. You start by building a cross compilation toolchain but… why? And you add the bootloader dead last, even though it’s the first thing you see when you boot a Linux machine? I reckon a better approach would be to build it step by step, only adding new things once you’ve discovered a need for them. First you get the bootloader working, then you get it to actually load the initramfs and kernel, etc… you could even create your own extremely simple initramfs first before adding dracut, etc… This gets you to a system you can boot and play with asap. And then you can slowly start to discover why you actually need all these things through exploration and experimentation.
•
[delayed]
•
> And you add the bootloader dead last, even though it’s the first thing you see when you boot a Linux machine? That actually makes perfect sense. If you did the bootloader first, how are you going to build it? How do you know what to boot from which filesystem on what device? By the time you've got your root filesystem complete, it's easy to tell. If you do things step by step incrementally, you keep having to go further back in the process. Starting over repeatedly gets tedious, boring and frustrating. And it'll take ages to finish the complete OS.
Ex-FTC boss Khan: break out the handcuffs for AI CEOs, citing 1934 precedent (theregister.com)
You're suggesting that Lina Khan is trying to give Trump an opportunity to pardon AI company people?
•
No. I think I was quite clear. Lina Khan is providing marketing for Trump's paid pardon by pre-registering a procedure for a government aligned with her interests to prosecute AI CEOs. What she is trying to do or trying not to do was not something I addressed. She does have a track record of achieving things she probably did not attend: e.g. ensuring total Chinese dominance of US household robotics.
Aaron Swartz was facing up to 35 years for wire fraud and hacking for swiping some JSTOR documents, and the DOJ has done nothing against the AI companies and their IP violating antics.
•
Meanwhile, in China they got the best video models cause they don't care much about IP. The irony that China, by being a threat, is preventing the west from lurching toward totalitarian is really interesting.
Because that's not what IP law is for. IP law was always corporate rent-seeking. None of those arguments about fairly compensating people for their creations or preserving the profit motive were ever being made in good faith. The point was always to force you to pay for something that would be free under natural laws. And I do mean you specifically, because the act of copying information freely was always going to be preserved for them.
•
Swartz was charged under the CFAA, like most hacking cases, and it clearly applies to the Anthropic and OpenAI cases.
> They participated in uploading the files as part of the downloading the torrent from other peers. Did they? Are you sure?
•
Meta argued in court that yes, they did upload when torrenting > Meta’s reasoning is straightforward. Anyone who uses BitTorrent to transfer files automatically uploads content to other people, as it is inherent to the protocol. In other words, the uploading wasn’t a choice, it was simply how the technology works. https://torrentfreak.com/uploading-pirated-books-via-bittorrent-qualifies-as-fair-use-meta/
•
No, only in some instances maybe, they were mostly leechers.
> Even in the western world most anti-ai sentiment ends on social media No. There's a lot of local regulations being enacted to prevent datacenter builds.
•
While I agree that it goes beyond social media, I don't believe your statement is evidence to such. I would call that more the manifestation of anti-Ai sentiment wherever they pick it up. I suspect it's popular because it has been a long long time since The People felt like government had been responsive, so they are doubling down, ad nausium
> For these reasons a large share of the industry holds out against the device This is where I stop agreeing, there are some, not large parts any more; not because they were forced to adopt it, but because it has finally become useful and an ROI. This is most evident in pull request reviews and root-cause analysis, both tasks they accel at without the generated code some people bemoan. If you aren't using it for this, you are doing a disservice to yourself and the quality of your code. Because more of industry feels this way, I do not believe the 'unfair' part (compelled to use it or lose your trade) will hold up, we want to use it because it makes us better at our trade
•
But hang on. None of this argument is about companies or people using AI being unfair in their practices. It is about companies and people training models and building AI products being unfair in their practice. (By forcing others to choose between adopting unscrupulous practices or dying.)
•
“If you aren't using it for this, you are doing a disservice to yourself and the quality of your code” I bow reluctantly to this device I consider unscrupulous.
Source: https://x.com/linamkhan/status/2099204390548639960 (seems like a single post, so you don't need to log in and see replies) I can't tell if Khan is being realistic when she says laws against “unfair or deceptive [acts]” or “unfair methods of competition” apply to AI labs. Her 2-sentence justifications aren't enough to convince me. But maybe it's sufficient for state AG's who want to start investigations.
•
[delayed]
 Top