I need food in my house.

If you stopped irrigating crops in the US desert southwest, there would be no water issues at all, either for households or for industry.

I'll repeat, it is agriculture that consumes meaningful amounts of water, not homes and businesses. Farms by water by the acre foot - an acre of land flooded to a depth of one foot. Water is not abundant on the scale of "farms buying it by the acre foot", but it absolutely is on the scale of "what you need for your house".

If you were worth listening to, you wouldn't have needed help to write that comment.

So far US courts have said that person cannot have a copyright.

This might change up in the future, but so far, the prompter is not considered to be a creator.

That comment was about what if that code is later determined to have a copyright apply to it.

"I'm sure if I cared enough to go looking".

So you just made a weird, false assumption in order to justify to yourself something you already wanted to do.

I used to have your viewpoint, by the way. The reality eventually became undeniable. Musk is a unique threat to western democracy.

I think AI copyright is going to kill Linux. Allowing uncopyrightable code into your project could be determined by a court to destroy your whole license, forcing ALL your code to be released as uncopyrightable and putting GPL-licensed code into the public domain where it can be monetized by corporations without having to give anything back. None of this is how copyright law is supposed to work, but if I've learned one thing about governments and laws and courts it's that they often aren't created for our benefit.

I would not trust ChatGPT to do literally any of those things correctly, as they can all be misinterpreted, and even when I ask AI to answer simple questions it often does that. If I want a timer, I run the timer app on my phone. If I want a reminder tomorrow, I run the calendar app on my phone. There's no question about whether it got the information into it I wanted, because I can see that I put it in there. I don't have to wonder whether the LLM will fail to put the information in, but then confidently tell me it did it correctly, and then tell me I was correct to push back when it didn't do it and I'm late tomorrow. Fuck all of that, all day every day, and anyone who thinks it's an improvement is not only mentally deficient but also training themselves to be even moreso.

There's probably at least a smattering of middle managers here convinced that they "get it" because they read Slashdot. This slashvertisement is aimed at them.

There is no such thing, there never has been, and such a thing is undesirable. We do not want or need a paper which simply repeats claims as they are made. We need the media to compare claims to facts. It's not the media's fault that the reich wing lies more.

It's hard to say, because those courts have usually decided in favor of rights holders, and they are how we got a copyright cartel in the first place.

I'm finding that ZFS is stupid, and I'm thinking about switching to normal dmraid.

Notably, if you really load it up for a while such that it has a chance to fill up its buffers, it doesn't save any I/O for anything else. The whole system just gets punched right in the fucking balls and becomes completely unusable while the cache empties. Maybe there's some way to tune this tendency out of it, but...SANE DEFAULTS!!! If your project doesn't have them, you're a fuckup! Allowing one process to make a system unusable, that's a fuckup!

When you combine that with the raging arrogant attitudes of about 50% of ZFS think-they're-experts and all of the things which ZFS should be able to do which you're told not to do (like rotating a disk from a 3-way mirror as a short term backup strategy) it becomes clear that it's actually a big joke. The proponents say ZFS can do everything, then they tell you not to do thing after thing and it becomes clear it can only do about half of what they claim.

We had discussions about this here at the time. You may feel free to locate and review them so we don't have to have them again. TL;DR: no clue about Arch, but Debian pushed the decision through with less consensus than usual to support the new GNOME, which depended on it, and which statistically no one was asking for.

It's a bunch of utilities that depend on the same libraries and one another, you cannot just separate out any pieces you want and use them independently, some of them come in packs and using one implies using the next, or having a real bad time. That is the root of the complaint about systemd not following the Unix way.

Yes, the KDE devs are smarter and more competent than the GNOME devs.

But no, you can't. This becomes immediately apparent when you try to talk to them in the way you would talk to a normal person. You ask them for something which should be simple because what you want to know is what most people would want to know. You ask it the simple question and it frequently takes the most obscure view of the question possible. So then you have to rephrase the question once or twice to be incredibly specific in a way that would be unnecessary if you were talking to a human, since they are also humans and know what specifics you were expecting to have addressed.