> Frankly if there's anywhere where I would most like to see AI generated work -- which is frankly based on weights generated from the broad and indiscriminate harvesting of other people's works -- is in copylefted software that takes the distillations of the efforts of the community and makes it available as free software with free software protections.
I agree wholeheartedly with this. We have large corporations stealing work left right and center. Lets utilise that to our benefit and make open and free versions of all software. The crux is that to do that each individual has to pay currency to use this tool. Maybe there is a place for collectives to collect money and to utilise llms to free software. (What strange times we live in.)
A slight aside, open source lived and breathed the idea of ownership of software, be that a council, a handful of committed maintainers, a BDFL and all things in between and adjacent. There isn't really much wrong with "vibe coded" software, the issue seems to be owning that software. Things feels fundamentally more fluid, based on specs and more importantly tests that actually define the features that the software is expected to perform. Not ownership, but more like a contract.
I've gone back and forth in my usage of LLMs, from full on vibe coding, to plans and execution, to just using the autocomplete in Clion. I've basically stabilized to a few types of usage now for vibe coding, all notably for ideas or disposable code
- prototypes for games, pipe it a love2d template and let it loose. Make sure it wires in a crude imgui style gui so that I can twiddle various numbers.
- wild refactor ideas in a new branch which I never keep. Used for reference basically.
- the main one. Getting it to create disposable tooling. This has been huge for me, and a lot of nice to have tools in the past I can now get an llm to create in a few minutes.
I too quit a job that made a significant pivot to weapons R&D. It was a hard move, and honestly I still haven't recovered from it. I don't regret the decision in the slightest though.
One aspect that sticks with me was the sheer excitement of a lot of people in the room, engineers excited to be working on new problems. I believe many didn't consider the consequences of their labor.
As a worker it can take time for it to sink in that the products you are actively working on are being used for immoral/unethical purposes. I've also noticed a perceived weakness when expressing these types of views to colleagues, responses either masked by apathy or just direct justified destruction of lives along patriotic or ideological lines.
Its worth bringing up these stories whenever appropriate I believe, people sometimes _need_ a jolt even if the probability of success are low.
I've settled over the years on using syncthing to keep copies on my machine and phone. After testing quite a few android players I settled on Oto Music. I'm currently back in the Mac world and use Cog. I still like to use cmus in the terminal.
For acquiring music, the bulk I get from bandcamp. I usually try hard to get my music legally, but sometimes it isn't possible, ripping from YouTube, searching torrent sites, using russian search sites which still seem to index the blogs that stored downloadable links to music like we had about 10 years ago...
I agree wholeheartedly with this. We have large corporations stealing work left right and center. Lets utilise that to our benefit and make open and free versions of all software. The crux is that to do that each individual has to pay currency to use this tool. Maybe there is a place for collectives to collect money and to utilise llms to free software. (What strange times we live in.)
A slight aside, open source lived and breathed the idea of ownership of software, be that a council, a handful of committed maintainers, a BDFL and all things in between and adjacent. There isn't really much wrong with "vibe coded" software, the issue seems to be owning that software. Things feels fundamentally more fluid, based on specs and more importantly tests that actually define the features that the software is expected to perform. Not ownership, but more like a contract.