Assembly code isn’t ”compiled”. To quote wikipedia:

Assembly code is converted into executable machine code by a utility program referred to as an assembler. […] The conversion process is referred to as assembly, as in assembling the source code. The computational step when an assembler is processing a program is called assembly time.

My point is that people are already trying to replace compilers with LLMs, and yes, it is stupid as shit, but still real.

Also, maybe see if an LLM can help you detect sarcasm without explicit content tagging.

Yes, but why write C when we can let the LLM write assembly directly? Compilers are unnecessary bloat we don’t have a need for with modern technology.

Second hand market also drives demand.

No, you misunderstood me I think. I’m happy to throw money at Jolla, and I have done so.

I’m not impressed about people complaining that Sailfish is ”proprietary” while handing money over to Google.

The Graphene team are probably fantastic people.

The toenail-slingers are usually not writing that much code.

Oh shut up.

This is why we can’t have nice things. Everytime something took a step in the right direction the past two decades in open source, someone started throwing toenails around, scaring off people.

And while you throw ”proprietary” around with the toenails, you are the one here telling people to throw money at Google to buy a pixel. At least put your money where your mouth is and buy libre hardware.

The community doesn’t put food on the table. Money does.

That’s my somewhat cynical take on it. The reality is that for anything other than hobby projects, devs need to be paid.

If I’m running a large corp, there are several legitimate (capitalist) reasons to use and develop some stuff in the open:

• Trust in my products
• Easier recruitment
• Division of effort

But at some point, money needs to come in. That means I need to have an edge, somewhere. GPL is a risk to that edge, especially GPL3. Now, the actual edge simply might just be ”yeah, we are really good at this, give us money and we’ll help you”, or it’s a proprietary extension to something.

For most open source projects, the devs are mostly full time and paid somehow. Basically, if we want copyleft licenses, fork up the gold.

You say that companies can ”steal” the efforts. Sure, but the alternative isn’t copyleft, the alternative is that the funding goes to proprietary code, unless the existing hobby project is ”captive” enough (e.g. Linux).

I would love to change this, but that would require massive pubic funding of open source projects. Personally, I think governments should slowly migrate to open source and transfer whatever they save on licensing over to open source funding. In my opinion, any model for sustainable open source must include a funding model before I can take it seriously, and most of the copyleft movement simply doesn’t want to take funding seriously.

Regardless of how much brainrot AI leaves us with and all related ethical wuestions, I think the point stands. At a technical level AI is unquestionably very good at finding issues in code, albeit with a varying rate of false positives.

I would be so happy if we decided to use our clankers to help us get rid of all bugs, instead of just prompting more buggy garbage into existance.

given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow

Artificial eyeballs seem to work a lot better than no eyeballs at all, and it looks like a lot of humanity’s code is hot garbage.

Ricoh GRiii

Sooo, Ricoh GRiii is actually amazing. I barely use my phone for photos anymore.

I hope no one tries to push GPO-like stuff on Linux. I get where you are coming from, but for example Puppet will give you a lot more power and and flexibility. There is no registry. ”Everything is a file” is actually true, you just manage a bunch of config files instead.

As for AD, you have FreeIPA as the major contender. It works. You can also just join your Linux clients to your AD. Kerberos works just as expected.

(RedHat actually tried pushing management of Gnome via FreeIPA á la GPO. It sucks, because the desktop environment is just a tiny part of what you might want to manage, so suddenly you need to have both that bullshit and your normal configuration management tool.)

It’s getting there, slowly.

• Clevis can do network and TPM pinned disk decryption.
• With Linux UKIs you can do self signed secure boot, we still need the mechanisms for central signing. This would actually be better that windows, you control your own PKI and Microsoft can’t sign garbage your machines boot.
• Logs is a somewhat bogus argument - log falsification on Windows has been done too. But linux is rather unprotected in comparison.

But the biggest issue is the mentality of ”I own my computer”. Sure, you own your private machine, but your company owns the computer you use for work and the data on it and has an interest in protecting that data from you. That particular threat model is hard to communicate, as Linux users normally don’t think of themselves as a threat vector.

This is the one thing holding open source back, and the thing Linux users keep pissing on without understanding it.

The CTOs inept nephew can manage your fleet of windows machines and you get all the checkbox security you need for compliance (and some real security):

• Centrally managed
• Logs that are fairly hard to manipulate
• SecureBoot + Bitlocker

That same feature set on Linux will cost you a ton of money in skilled staff if you want to check the same compliance checkboxes. (As for real security, who cares, no one is doing that anyway)