Replying to
@DekOfTheYautja@social.vivaldi.net
Remote
Niccolò Venerandi
@niccolove@fosstodon.org
mastodon
4.6.6
Ehilà.
c.f.r.: nicco.love
2781
Followers
133
Following
38
Posts
Joined May 03, 2022
Posts
I'm working on such a cool project and y'all are going to love it (and forgive me for the cw & ai tweets :P)
I'm not sold on the fact that politics-related toots should get CW for politics. What's the most convincing argument to do that?
Replying to
@niccolove@fosstodon.org
@sgued@pouet.chapril.org like, the CoC technically is in violation of the CoC because it talks about the usage of LLMs. Come on
Replying to
@sgued@pouet.chapril.org
@sgued@pouet.chapril.org To make one example: banning people for even *talking* about LLM is absurd, come on, it has no reasonable justification and a project has no right to tell me I can't even acknowledge that some technologies even exist
Zig's Code of Conduct take on LLM is absolutely insane. How on earth did people allow this? Gives me zero trust on the project
experiencing the programmer version of artists' "your art is ai!" as people accuse my app of being entirely vibecoded lol
Getting closer and closer to a real app here
Can everybody link me to the best Linux / FOSS related merch? Like t shirts and such
Replying to
@jibsaram@68k.social
@jibsaram The reasonable option IMO is the most obvious one: treat contributions as we've always done, putting the responsibility of submitted code in the author, regardless of the tools used to make the code. If the code is bad, or the MR misses obvious parts / is low quality, then it should be denied (and the author potentially banned, if it's that bad!). We don't need any extra AI rule IMO, just take responsibility for what you submit.
Replying to
@onekopaka@masto.theoks.net
@onekopaka@masto.theoks.net @mastodonmigration@mastodon.online Okay, folks, but the original question still does not make sense:
Are integrations between Blender and AI companies permitted?
Yes, regardless of this module.
Replying to
@jibsaram@68k.social
@jibsaram @mastodonmigration@mastodon.online It's much easier than that: policies should be enforceable. Same applies to laws, by the way! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unenforced_law
Replying to
@niccolove@fosstodon.org
@mastodonmigration@mastodon.online
API, it seems absurd to me that Blender would police who can use the API. I doubt it's even possible.
Are Ai companies going to be able to train their models on Blender user's content?
If models are publicly available then it probably already happened. If not, then obviously not. How would a donation change anything here?
Replying to
@mastodonmigration@mastodon.online
@mastodonmigration@mastodon.online I'm sorry that I keep being critical about this, but I really feel like I have to point out that these questions hardly make sense
Is generative AI code used or permitted to be used in Blender development?
It's impossibile to determine for sure whether a PR contains AI generated code. Any big FOSS project will contain AI generated code pretty soon, regardless of its policy.
Are integrations between Blender and AI companies permitted?
Blender exposes an Python (1/2)
Step by step...
Replying to
@reflex@retrogaming.social
people never shoulda returned all that Epstein money either I suppose
Obviously not? Why would you give money to a pedophile? Weird. Give it to some non profit or something
Replying to
@reflex@retrogaming.social
- obviously yes if I can do good things with it?
- I don't think anthropic are bad people
- yeah there's such a thing. Sure I need to keep in mind that they might stop, but that's still more money than not having any in the first place
idk folks, I really can't agree with the comments here, if a company offers you 240k€/year no strings attached to just improve your software, I would take the offer anytime even from Anthropic, c'mon
Replying to
@reflex@retrogaming.social
@reflex Because context matters. A brief appearance in the background of a console that's indirectly related to a military company can be more easily explained by wanting to showcase many different consoles, just like they sent dev units to many distro people and not DHH specifically. I find it much easier to believe that they actually believe in the "big tent" idea they shared, I'm not a fan of it, but given how much of a support they're giving to the FOSS world, they are a net positive imo
Replying to
@Ferrah@social.vivaldi.net
Replying to
@reflex@retrogaming.social
@reflex I still think the company is a strong net positive to the world, especially the FOSS world. I would have (strongly) preferred if they hadn't sent a dev unit to DHH, but it's not a deal breaker for me personally. I can understand the disappointment though.
Quick update on Plasma Studio development
What do you think
@lexinova@cyberplace.social Sorry! Though, it should be possible to write a twin plugin in JS that avoids that.
I just watched the whole first season of I am not okay with this and what the f*** do you mean there's no season 2?
Aaaaaaa *head explodes*
I'm building a todo/event Android app that uses probabilities & montecarlo simulations to build your schedule. Suggestions for a name? Was thinking "Will Probably Do"
@shellheim@social.linux.pizza added to list
Replying to
@fabiscafe@mstdn.social
@fabiscafe IMO, yes. I think there's a significant difference between sending laptop(s) to test for hardware support, and sending a significant amount of money to someone. But regardless of that, if somebody claims that framework has financially supported DHH, that's still misinformation, even if you think that there's no much difference between the two.
@leroy@indiehackers.social I really don't think that was the issue… it was only brought up by one, max two people. Still, the hardware was provided to test hardware compatibility (not monetized videos), and I think it would be a huge stretch to define "sending a machine to test hardware compatibility" as "financial support", since it does not help DHH finances at all.
Replying to
@niccolove@fosstodon.org
When I pushed back, I think many felt attacked and felt the need to state their disgust and unwillingness to buy from Frameworks. None of which was the topic of the discussion.
The point is, again: falsely claiming that a company financially supports a neo-nazi is, IMO, really bad behavior, regardless of what other bad things the company is doing.
Since we're not on Twitter, can we please have an adult conversation that's able to discuss things in their merit without feeling attacked? [2/2]
Let's have a serious discussion. Yesterday I mentioned Framework, and somebody claimed that they have financially supported neo-nazi DHH.
To the best of my knowledge, this is misinformation. They *never* did that. And I think that falsely accusing a company of financially supporting neo-nazis is bad.
When I asked for a source, many chimed in, providing information about Framework's financial support to other projects or other kinds of support to DHH, thus missing the point entirely. [1/2]
Me: adds an LGBT flag in some videos
Comments: don't bring politics into open source! It's wrong! We don't want politics!
Me: makes multiple videos about European legislation, EU Parliament, how to be politically active
Comments: lovely, please make more videos like this!
Replying to
@mokazemi@techhub.social