Yes and no, my experience with it is that it is trying to be a minimal Git format-compatible tool that conforms with the coding style and practices of the OpenBSD community, along with their style of development: patches onto mailing lists. It is likely the hope of its developers that it would be included into OpenBSD base at some point. So, true, the license is a part of it, but one part of many.
I am in a similar situation and I am out from this point as well. Mullvad does a lot of wonderful work, but I think debating whether Örebropartiet's positions are reasonable or not misses the point. Head over to Allard's Twitter feed [1], as he has not yet published a coherent manifesto anywhere from what I can tell. If you do not read Swedish, get some sort of translation tool going. Keep in mind, this is how he wants to appear to the world.
Sure, you find the odd reasonably put politic position. But, mostly, it is memes. Screaming. Ranting. Insults. Calling the head of the Swedish police a "crying bitch". Retweets of posts from who are not even shy in terms of being bigots and racists. The man is a toxic toad and I would rather have seen him paid to shut up than anything else. Yes, we need diverse viewpoints to be heard and we should be respectful and careful to shut them down. But, Allard is not this person and he is just ruining public discourse even further and waging an insane culture war (in my mum's constituency at that). Call me old-fashioned, but I expect representatives to at least try to strive towards holding morals and behaviour above the mean of society.
I have read Mullvad's blog post, but not Berntsson' yet (it is bloody long and I am at work, but skimming it, I saw nothing arguing why "public discourse arson" is warranted and just "something needs to be done, this is something"), so maybe I am missing some context. But if the answer to your question is "Bank-roll Allard", maybe it is time to take a step back and ask yourself what on Earth your question was in the first place? Because it seems to me like you are playing with fire and risk burning all that we hold dear to the ground. Do your views not have a Johan Norberg-like [2] character (something very rare, a Swedish Libertarian that has contributed to public discourse for over twenty years) that you can support instead? Or is the direction you want to see only professed by people that behave very close to what I would describe as the very worst our species have to offer?
No, but it would have been a move from the research division to the applications division at the time. This is around ten years ago, between Atari (pre-Google acquisition) and AlphaGo (post-Google acquisition), so I am unsure exactly what the effect would have been inside the organisation. But, if it was bad enough for people to want to leave I suspect it can not just have been about the label.
I should emphasise that DeepMind (based in London and having a very large degree of independence until the merger in 2023) and Google DeepMind (remember now that Google's research labs across the globe got merged into this entity, including the one in London that was previously split from DeepMind "proper", so it can be hard to tell at times what one means by "DeepMind") has always produced good research. But what led to the LLM explosion primarily came from Google Research Mountain View (Transformer), Google Research Seattle (BERT), OpenAI (GPT-3), and various academic labs. During this time DeepMind had a broad research agenda, but my impression is that most resources went towards more traditional deep learning agents in 3D environments, foundational algorithmic research, and games (StarCraft 2). I would provide more detail, but as as an NLP researcher, I did frankly not pay much attention to DeepMind in that era as what was interesting to me just came from elsewhere.
When Google made its first big move into LLMs, its first interesting work did not come out of DeepMind, but rather again Mountain View with PaLM in 2022. Someone with closer connections to Demis at the time can probably explain why the research agenda was what it was, but I lack those connections and DeepMind (even now) has been notoriously tight-lipped since the founding of OpenAI (Demis allegedly sees OpenAI as founded on DeepMind technology by interns and staff walking out on them and remember OpenAI's initial focus on games with Dota 2 compared to DeepMind's with StarCraft 2) and was rather insular compared to Google Research, FAIR, etc. I say "was", but not because DeepMind is now more open, but rather that all industry research outlets are now incredibly tight-lipped after LLMs becoming a product and point of pride among them. At this point, research is held back for maybe even a year before publication or never published at all to deny any perceived advantage to the competition.
But even geniuses make mistakes. For example, Demis bet hard against language having any sort of real impact in AI research. So hard in fact that DeepMind nearly had its language research team walk out on them as they were about to be labelled as "applied". Now, to be fair, once the evidence was mounting that large language models rather than pure reinforcement learning was the way forward Demis and DeepMind changed course and has been great at catching up. However, it is important to remember that no person is infallible.
As a counter opinion to "too slow" in regards to 54Mbps, as it likely depends on your use cases. My WRT54GL was the primary family router until 2018 and even worked just fine for live video broadcasting. Even today it sees good use for video calls with no issues at all. Lovely little piece of hardware that refuses to die. Just a shame that OpenWRT has dropped support since 2013, which feels a bit ironic given their name.
My experience is that minor improvements tend to get accepted if they come with a solid technical motivation and fits into the overall OpenBSD mindset and ecosystem. If the change is simply justified by "best practices" and is rather large, then the conservative choice of just leaving things as they are usually prevail.
For example, I think I have seen two proposals for major overhauls of the OpenBSD.org homepage by "outsiders" over the last three years or so and they were both rejected. However, as you can see by the commit log, minor improvements (including presentation ones) happen all the time.
Really? A cause of our societal decline is requesting a CD for a repository that is too big to fit on it? Call me a naive optimist, but I would like to believe that whoever is reading the form results on GitHub's end is more than capable to make the call within a few seconds as to whether they also would find some joy in the challenge the size poses or just ignore it and move on with their day.
Riddle me this, what was the cost to me in terms of trying? If I feel like treating this like the fun we used to have online, what is the point in sucking all the fun out of it by "going lawyer" on the conditions? If I get a CD (or even DVD), it will be a fun story to tell (like when I asked Schneier to write a true Schneier Fact as opposed to his signature when I ordered a signed copy of one of his books). If I get nothing, well, I guess my life is simply over at that point.
Felt the same way initially, but you are very much right that this feels like a throwback to a more playful time about twenty years ago. Put in a request for the OpenBSD src repository, which is too big to fit on a CD these days and I am looking forward to see if/how they square that circle. OpenBSD used to ship their code on CDs up until about ten years ago, so it is a bit of a fun throwback in that way as well.
Why would we? There are plenty of us that believe in free speech, but would rather not see our money go towards bankrolling further destroying public discourse like you see Allard doing. It is perfectly possible to forward your opinions without setting the public square on fire. The kind of rhetoric that you profess here is dangerous and I see it all too often in the US. If no side attempts to hold the high ground, all we will have is a race towards the bottom and at some point arguing that it is high time to send the other side off to the camps and that is not a future I want to see.
Tried to find something from the party itself, but found nothing on their homepage other than that they plan to publish a party programme "gradually, starting some time during the summer of 2026".
> Of course I get downvoted for saying this. HN isn't interested in reality any more.
I suspect that rather many of us are simply just tired of Claude and friends getting shoehorned into any conversation about programming at this point. It is about as fun as the Rust Brigade entering any discussion about C. It adds nothing new to the discussion and it is frankly tiring since we pretty much at any time have a handful of conversations on the front page already covering "AI" topics anyway (counting four at the time of writing this).
Yes, that is common though. You have a variety of measurements, from a variety of technologies, from a variety of distances, and from a variety of sources. Given the damage a quake and tsunami can cause, especially the early measurements are estimates that later get corrected in light of new information. In Japan for example, it is very much not uncommon that early tsunami warnings are later cancelled. Yes, false alarms are bad, but the example I usually use in terms of how much time can matter is the 1983 Sea of Japan quake [1], where the tsunami hit in 12 minutes after the quake.
As a type-1 diabetic, in my experience it is perfectly possible to end up in a situation like this even if you are responsible. Remember, type-1 diabetes is a condition that requires your attention tens if not a hundred times per day. This is not just on good days, but also on your very worst days when you are juggling everything else that life throws at you and you may not have slept properly for days. So, maybe you had noticed that your emergency glucose was low, but in this instance out of a hundred you forgot to replace it when you came home because you were exhausted and then overslept and had to rush out in the morning. What makes type-1 diabetes challenging is not that you can not technically manage every single one of the decisions and actions that it demands out of you, it is that you must carry them out under all conditions and largely without fail for every day in your life or you will suffer both short-term and long-term consequences. Everyone I know has had a nightmare episode.
Just a final recent anecdote to illustrate some of the complexity. It may look like maths on the surface, but even something like "carbohydrate ratio" is a fluid concept. Yesterday for example I was out and about in the sun and had the very same bottle of sweet tea that I have had for months. Given that I knew I was physically active and it was hot, I reduced the usual dosage for this specific drink by 80% to be on the safe side. To my surprise, on this particular day for whatever reason this was still far too much and I pushed myself into hypoglycemia in little over an hour. We humans are highly dynamic and complex systems and this is me failing with the very best technology we have available: Insulin pump and continuous glucose monitor.
I have run NixOS for about eight years on server and desktop and been a nixpkgs maintainer. Yes, most of the time I would agree with you. The fact that you get warnings in the terminal for a lot of incompatibilities and changes when upgrading is a really nice touch and upgrades tend to be smooth. I do not use rollbacks much, but when you do need them they are really handy. Having every configuration in a single file makes you more bold to play around with configurations, which felt really empowering when I first got into NixOS, as I knew it could roll things back and I no longer had to keep notes on how each box was set up to refer to in the case of a reinstall or migration.
However, I have had one machine become unbootable as it could no longer mount its encrypted disks after an upgrade, forcing me to mount a rescue image remotely, mount the disks manually, lift the data out, and do a complete reinstall (migrated the box to OpenBSD at that time). Similarly, NixOS once messed up systemd (or vice versa) so badly that I could not even reboot without forcing a power cycle. Lastly, I have had a package break for my use cases by maintainers enabling so many custom flags by default for a package that they enabled one I have never seen enabled by any other packaging team and that then broke RTSP in "funny" ways. Ubuntu did tend to break things like graphics between releases at times back when I used it, but I have never had any other distribution or operating system throw curve balls like the three things I mentioned here.
My general impression of NixOS is that the core is solid, but that nixpkgs just has such a large number of things that it supports that the maintainers struggle to test them all and can not anticipate the interactions between all the packages and options. The default Julia package being so broken that it produced incorrect mathematics due to nixpkgs' insistence on allowing you to swap out the Blas library and also having turned off the unit tests for example springs to mind. This was shipped to end users for a long time before I noticed it by accident by enabling the unit tests and stepped in to clean it up. It all feels very "Gentoo", which was indeed an inspiration for NixOS by the way.
Now, return to that last sentence in the first paragraph that I wrote about feeling empowered to tinker, ultimately, I feel like you should try to resist that urge as it is what pushes you into the untested fractal of possible configurations that NixOS allows you to explore. My other main operating system is OpenBSD, where the mentality is "Stick to the defaults or suffer the consequences"; with NixOS, I feel like everyone's box is more or less a tailored suit, which comes with both its ups and downs.
Kenji Aoyama truly is aligned with the best of the hacker spirit. As for getting your hands on a luna88k, I have no clue. The only thing I managed to find was a broken one that sold for ~USD 750 at an online auction.
Well, it surely did not help that the government has been drip-feeding us computational resources. First we had about 16 GPU nodes to share between the whole country for over a decade. Then just before Isambard-AI came online they made one open call for about a week where you could get nearly enough to train a sizeable model, but the call was poorly advertised and in the middle of high vacation season. After this, the only big call explicitly cut out training large language models by its scope and the general calls have been peanuts and less than me and the UK-LLM team had access to during the Isambard-AI beta phase! When I gave a talk at White Hall recently my message was clear: We have the team, the knowledge, the data, etc. We just need an open call for enough compute to train the darn thing! Here is to hoping that they listened.
There is also this:
https://gothub.org