I am a person online.
This framing is probaly meant to normalize it in the minds of the target audience so that they’ll more likely dare to click. I don’t think people say that outside of adds for this content and maybe the consumers of that content trying to reassure themselves.
Remember this, aspiring engineers:
If you can make a thing that’s pretty neat in ideal conditions when everything works as it should, you can stop there. It is not your responsibilty to handle what can happen in irregular circumstances or to handle potential failures. Assume everything will always be alright, and if not, it’ll be someone else’s problem.
Who’s the authoritarianism leftist?
The truly awakened no longer care whether Bush did the 11/09/2001 incident because it wouldn’t be the worst thing he’s done anyway.
the actual fascism in America is not the Trumpian right. It’s the neoliberal center, it’s the blob, it’s 90% of the politicians.
Yes, and that’s why I don’t speak of identifying fascists individuals or groups, but fascist policies. Because when people whose political awakening was the realization that massively arresting people for suspicion of irregular situation and deporting them is fascism, that waging genocidal wars for profits is fascism that using racist dogwistles in political speeches is fascism, and that their own country isn’t immune to fascism, and then when they see that this fascism is perpetuated under democrats, then those of them who were speaking in good faith when they called out Trump may end up drawing the right conclusions.
Recognizing fascism is one thing, I think what can bring them further left is the disillusionment when democrats fail to fix what they rightfully identified as such. ICE was created under Georges Bush Jr. Obama could have abolished it, instead it just kept expanding. Biden had a chance to do it too, when their nature, ideology and potential as a fascist militia had already been brought to light by the first Trump administration, yet he didn’t, ICE remained active under Biden. The wall that democrats had been so vocally against during Trump’s first campaign not only wasn’t dismantled but kept being built.
These aren’t, to us, the gravest or deepest examples of the democrat’s hypocrisy, of course the global imperialisn and the prison industrial system take precedence, and of course, capitalism itself. But to a young naive democrat, these things already part of a background that they take for granted, of which they may criticise specific excesses but aren’t ready to question at their root.
Therefore, it is already a good start for more people to identify specific policies as fascist and be against that fascism. They still have a long way to go, and most will probably never go all the way, but everyone must start somewhere.
Gaston et Grobide build a contraption that gives them just enough cheese for their amount of bread and just enough wine to go with their cheese. However, due to a calibration error, it ends up stuck in a loop where it keeps giving more bread, more cheese and more wine. Grobide notices the problem and has to solve it before Gaston dies of alcohol poisoning, but the later insists that he needs just a little more wine to wash down that last bit of cheese… but then he wants just a little more bread and cheese…
They could’ve accepted upstream code using AI. This was the proposal:
Choice 1: No LLM contributions to Debian via Social Contract Preamble
This proposal aims to expressly forbid any contributions to Debian written with the use or assistance of large language models (LLMs) or other generative AI tools.
The scope of this GR is (non-exhaustive):
Debian source packages
Official Debian project software, such as lintian
Debian web resources
Documentation and translations added by Debian contributors
Official communication from Debian
It does not include:
Upstream projects using LLMs for development
AI-related software
Upstream patches/security fixes etc
However, the result’s arrived. The accepted proposal is the fifth :
Choice 5: Responsible Use of Generative AI
Using its power under Constitution section 4.1 (5), the project issues the following statement describing its current position on AI-assisted contributions. This statement describes the position of the project at the time it is adopted. That position may evolve as time passes without the need to resort to future general resolutions. The GR process remains available if the project needs a decision and cannot come to a consensus.
Debian neither endorses nor prohibits the use of generative AI tools in the development, maintenance, or documentation of software, packaging, documentation, and other media published within the Debian Project. We recognize that such tools can substantially improve the productivity of contributors when used responsibly, allowing volunteers to spend more of their limited time on work that requires technical expertise, judgment, review, and collaboration.
The Debian Project nevertheless expects that all contributions submitted to Debian, regardless of how and with which tools they were produced, satisfy the same standards of quality, correctness, maintainability, and legal compliance. The use of a generative AI tool does not diminish the contributor’s responsibility for the work they submit. Contributors are expected to understand, review, test, and, where appropriate, modify AI-assisted output before incorporating it into Debian. Blindly accepting or uploading AI-generated material without appropriate human review is inconsistent with Debian’s established development practices. We enourage our contributors to disclose whether a contribution was made with AI assitance, but do not require them to do so.
Debian acknowledges that the legal status of material produced by generative AI systems remains the subject of ongoing discussion in many jurisdictions, including questions relating to copyright, authorship, licensing, and potential reproduction of training material. The Project does not seek to resolve these unsettled legal questions through this General Resolution, nor does it adopt a position on whether AI-generated output is, in whole or in part, copyrightable or derived from copyrighted works.
Instead, Debian continues to rely on the judgment and responsibility of its individual contributors. Project members are expected to exercise appropriate care when using generative AI tools, to consider the provenance and licensing implications of material they contribute, and to avoid introducing content whose legal status they cannot reasonably justify. Existing Debian policies governing licensing, copyright, software freedom, and the acceptance of contributions continue to apply irrespective of the tools used to produce those contributions.
Contributors are expected to exercise appropriate care when designing and implementing workflows that incorporate generative AI tools. In particular, they should ensure that confidential information, private communications, security-sensitive information (such as embargoed information about security bugs that is not yet public), cryptographic keys, credentials, and other non-public material relating to the Debian Project, its infrastructure, or its community are not disclosed to third-party AI services unless such disclosure has been explicitly authorized and is consistent with Debian’s security and privacy requirements.
The use of generative AI does not alter Debian’s established expectations regarding large-scale or automated project actions. Contributors intending to perform actions with broad project impact, such as mass bug filing or patch submission, large-scale code modifications, or other automated changes or requests affecting many packages or contributors, should seek prior discussion and consensus through the appropriate project channels before proceeding. Any such automated process should be overseen by a human who remains accountable for its behavior and output.
This resolution therefore affirms that generative AI is neither exempt from nor subject to special rules beyond the standards already expected of Debian contributors. The responsibility for every contribution rests with the contributor who submits it, who remains accountable for its technical quality, legal acceptability, and suitability for inclusion in Debian.
I think today’s they day the Debian devs vote! I hope the full ban will pass.
Thankfully, Eminem sucks. It’s worst when the music is a banger but the lyrics make you deeply cringe, like Cross-Eyed Mary by Jethro Tull.
I don’t have any better advice than this, but don’t kill yourself. Your problems are real, and maybe not immediately solvable, but not ultimately inextricable. People have risen again from such predicaments. As long as you’re alive there’s hope. And even of there weren’t… It’s not like you have to rush to your death. You can always die later. Waiting longer to see how bad it gets, or trying something, even something desperate to improve your situation never removes your ability to die later, but dying removes your ability to try anything and any chance of receiving help. Most people who attempted suicide and lived regret doing it. Don’t do it while there’s anything left to hope for or try… And there always is. Just don’t die.
Congrats on finding which half of the sky you’re supposed to hold up, comrade !
I, for one, love our Russian troll comrades and respect their pronouns.
I looked up the name from the signature becaus eI liked this cartoon, and it turns out Lilith Kievskaya is the founder of a left wing gun club 
How will this impact Charlie Kirk’s blueberry budget?
Admittedly, I didn’t watch the 1 hour 32 minute video, but from skimming through it it seems to be mostly about the US and USSR. But natonalism has a meaning that is neither just patriotism or the type seen in far-right parties of the imperial core and Russia.
“Nationalism” initially means thinking that a group of people constitute a nation and should have self-determination. It is sometimes said to have come from the French revolution, as the French both used it at home as a uniting factor to replace the discarded authority of the king and keep holding the place together, but also as a dividing factor in wars abroad, as France was mostly fighting Austria through the Austrian netherlands (present day Belgium) and Austria’s various vassals (multiple principalities along the Rhine plus the ltalian kingdoms). So when France occupied some place, anti-austrian grudges were fanned and independant “sister-republics” were formed. After Napoleon came into power, it was more kingdoms rather than republics, but the system more or less stayed, and after his final defeat, Austria got to claim a lot of territory back, but not everyone was happy to return to this.
In the following century, “nationalism” is more or less synonymous with “independantism”, with sometimes also the idea of reuniting with people of the same “nation” living under a different “state” (eg Poles partitioned between the Prussian, Austrian and Russian empites). The Russian, Austrian and Ottoman empire, which both englobes many nations, were particularly threatened by the rise of Nationalism. The two later were broken after WW1, while the prior… Resolved its inner contadictions on a different way that I assume we’re all familiar with.
Anyway, after that point, most nationalist movements in the global north are mostly “supra-nationalist”: Their nation already has a self-determined state. But some think this state doesn’t reflect their nation enough, either because there are too many people inside that don’t belong to the nation (according to them) and sould be excluded, or because there is too much land that should “rightfully” be theirs but sits outside their official borders. This, combined with anti-communist reaction and the imperial boomerang bringing back home some of the methods invented to oppress the global south, leads to fascism.
BUT in many places, “nationalism” kept its original meaning as a people seeking self-determination. Irish nationalism, Puerto-Rican nationalism, Black Natonalism, and of course, many decolonial movements like in Algeria used this word. It’s in this sense that Frantz Fanon wrote favorably of nationalism, which he sought was needed for African nations to get rid of the colonial yoke before they could build new ties.
For the Linux distro one, I think I’d switch the whole “libertarian right” and “libertarian left” pannels around, given as slackware, gento arch and LSF all use some version of the GPL, the three first are community-managed, amd LSF… Well, it’s not really a distro, so I guess user-managed would be the right word ? Meanwhile, the BSDs tend to use some variant of the BSD licence.
GPL and BSD are all open-source license, but GPL is a share-alike, or copyleft license, meaning a program based on a GPL software must also use the GPL. BSD meanwhile is a permissive license, which allows grabbing it and making a closed-source software out of it, which is more corporate-friendly, so more right-wing in my opinion.
I agree with Ubuntu being on the right, despite being GPL, since it’s managed by a company (canonical). Same for Fedora (well, it kinda got a hybrid status, it’s partly managed by Red Hat, but more community oriented than RHEL and accepts commits from more different sources). ChromeOS is obvious. But I rrally don’t get why any other Linux distros get out on the authoritarian right.
And Red Star OS ? The official state OS of North Korea ? On top right corner of the authoritarian right ? I would need to read their reasonning.
Scream, while you still have a mouth.
You call that a YTP? Several sections seem to be generated or edited using AI. A true YTP uses manually edited bits of speech, as Dialectics intended.