Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:I never stop being amazed (Score 4, Informative) 46

"Matter-over-Thread" is actually a solid strategy compared to most 'cloud connected' wifi smart devices.

This is more akin to Zigbee/Z-Wave. It's a local, non-internet scheme for local communication and control. You can get a totally local air-gapped Matter over Thread setup running without internet. It's if you pick a cloud-connected thread border router when you get in trouble, but you can roll your own, e.g. with Home Assistant platform providing a way forward.

Submission + - The Human Only Public License (vanderessen.com)

nmb3000 writes: With the rapid ascent of AI training, tools, and a push for more autonomous agents, do we need a new software licensing option for developers that don't want their work used to support or advance these systems? One developer says yes.

Whether artificial intelligence systems will end up being a positive or a negative force for humanity is still an open question. But we might find ourselves one day with AI embedded at every layer of our existence, living lives of toned down and diluted humanity with only our dreams for escape. Although I am not yet convinced of this worst case scenario, I believe it is important that we as software developers have at least the option to opt out of that system altogether, to be able to continue hacking, working, and tinkering in a space of our own in total absence of artificial intelligence systems, and share this luxury with our users.

I designed a software license for this purpose. It is called the Human Only Public License, or HOPL for short.

While a license like this is probably entirely unenforceable and goes against a strict open source ethos (both traits shared with the problematic "do not evil" JSON license), the appeal of continuing the tradition of one human creating something specifically for other humans is understandable. It also gives those developers who are concerned with the negative impact AI tools may have on software development as a field and career a way to push back.

The license is also published on GitHub.

Comment Re:What do they care? (Score 1) 44

Some possibilities:
-The agent buys the wrong thing and Amazon sees a substantially higher rate of returns or other bad customer feedback
-The agent buys one thing despite Amazon search results trying to push a different option
-Amazon's upsell for "you may also like" is tanked by the agentic purchaasing.

Comment Re:A lot of money (Score 2) 10

Don't worry, they are probably getting paid 300b by Oracle, 250b by microsoft, and 38b from Amazon so it all will work out nicely.

A lot of the deals lately seem to be company A and B pay each other X amount of money and pretend that is big revenue despite relatively little net money exchanging hands.

Comment Re:Who wants this? (Score 1) 54

You could, in theory, have a context that is entirely within the sandbox and useful. Hence my comment about getting things in and out of the environment potentially negating many of the scenarios I can think of. But broadly speaking, if you had some local processing to do, you feed the environment a blob and the environment can now pretend it's a normal file as far as it is concerned, and then you can pull the blob out when done. WASM can't touch real stuff but you can feed it stuff within the reach of javascript which itself is still sandboxed, but specific network touch points and user indicated file touch points can be put in the reach of javascript.

So if you wanted to apply, in browser, some linux utility to a file, then the user has to indicate a file for operating on via browser, and that action allows javascript code to access that file, and with that granted it can load it into some memory that you've allocated for this purpose, and when done move the data back or wherever.

But the much needed sandbox does greatly complicate things and for some sorts of files the resource usage would be prohibitive in this scenario.

Comment Re:Who wants this? (Score 1) 54

So I have had a few scenarios where I really didn't have any business moving data between the browser and a backend service and I would have just as soon done an operation client-side, but the ecosystem that was equipped to do the task wasn't exactly trivial to get to work in-browser. I could imagine some such use cases easier to port if a Linux instance could live transiently in browser runtime.

I've spent a fair amount if time trying to wrangle specific use cases into this scenario, but could imagine a 'lazier' way if a linux layer already abstracted away the browser runtime weirdness that many libraries aren't equipped to deal with naturally.

I think broadly speaking people that induce these requirements on my team are thinking the wrong things, and there's generally a smarter way to do it, but it does mean I get exposed to some weird use cases where a more traditional software interface is abstracting the browser-specific environment. Though I wager moving data in and out of the wasm may disrupt all the potential benefit...

Comment Re:What a bizarre fad ... (Score 2) 248

I agree this is more like 'religion' than science, as it is not falsifiable, even if this 'proof' purports to do that. It's kind of a pointless exercise of no practical use, however...

the universe that simulation is running in would need to be infinitely more complex and large than the one we're in. That's non-sensical in itself

But it isn't non-sensical. Because we would have no perspective to know about 'complexity' in absolute terms. We think quantum stuff is small and the speed of light is fast, but that's just because of what we possibly observe. If hypothetically a 3d engine were self aware, they may conclude that triangles are the impossibly smallest things, and some game engine limitations dictated some absolute limits to reality that the outside world sees as a significant simplification.

within a given universe that contains it.

That's the thing, by definition in the hypothetical the computation device is *not* within the given universe that contains it. Again, if you look at some of these things like minecraft where they build logic devices, they are, in the scale of the target universe, impossibly huge because that's what the in-engine physics allow. So again, such a self-aware hypothetical would conclude that even a simple calculator has to be the size of a large building and mock the concept of a handheld device being able to simulate everything they observe despite us knowing that such a game engine is in fact on the easier side of things a handheld computer can do.

so slow as to be pointless.

Which comes to another point, we have no absolute concept of time. If it takes the hypothetical higher order universe an hour to simulate a second of our universe, we'd be none the wiser. We do these sorts of things in simulation all the time, though we don't run it for long.

Also there's fact that we don't have any way of really *knowing* everything we think we remember and observe is substantially done at all. In Half Life in-universe they would perceive the phenomenon as some maddeningly complex physics stuff, because that's what the game engine presents. However we know that it's just "special effects". We think we have memory of many years and history of centuries, but a lot of games present themselves the same way, despite never actually *running* that material, just preloading the memory/history into the scenario. Any individual can only speak to what they see in that instant of time and can't know that there's really anything substantial directly behind them let alone light years away.

Trying to disprove is pretty much a waste because the goalposts can move freely.

Comment It's 2025 (Score 5, Interesting) 71

It's 2025. We've known for a couple of decades that Win32/Win64 and Windows and its main ecosystem only work because various hacks into the kernel to make it all run more smoothly. Even the video driver architecture basically has built in restarts when buffers blow up.

It's a shitty proprietary operating system which somehow, every time they try to clean it up, it gets worse under and on top of the hood. I stopped using Windows for my own personal devices four years ago, and will not go back. Ubuntu, Debian and MacOS offer cleaner UIs, and even if the software libraries are a bit smaller, at least I'm not a prisoner to endless ads.

Christ I had to set up a Win11 laptop yesterday, and between setting up the OS and Edge I had to turn down "offers" and additional tracking functionality around seven or eight times. Actually more, because then I set up a non-privileged user profile, and had to do it all again. And that was Win11 Pro. I can only imagine how much worse the Home editions are.

Comment Re:Who cares about this fanboi's take? (Score 1) 36

I think it was intended as a supremely milquetoast query that would have a search engine pretty much pop up a specific thing the user is after.

And the LLM first approach is *really* bad at that. If you are looking for an existing, canned piece of content, the LLM is a let down. A large chunk of what people want is an existing thing.

LLM as a readily available *option* for the sorts of inputs that it works with? Sure. As a replacement for internet search, not so much.

Slashdot Top Deals

If a thing's worth doing, it is worth doing badly. -- G.K. Chesterton

Working...