They are major concerns, but they aren't the only reasons people would use Linux, and also not everyone who uses Linux does it for these reasons. For example, while I care about them, my most important reason for using it is utility features such as my tiling WM.
That only works if the main reason someone uses Linux is personal privacy.
The biggest issue is that there isn't a universal agreement on what causes harm. There is agreement on the basics - murder, violence, etc - but they're already illegal anyways, no need to ban them by license.
upcoming EU AI Act that regulates open source systems differently, creating an urgent need for practical openness assessment
So when they say "openness" they do put it in the context of open source rather accessibility.
Because FOSS shouldn't add burdens. You publish your work and let everyone else use it. That shouldn't add extra obligations on you. Usually, you'd also write some docs - after all, without them nobody will know how to use your program, so why bother publishing - but it shouldn't be an obligation. Make it easy for people to open up their code without this attaching strings.
Documentation is nice, but it's kind of different thing that open source: a program can be open and undocumented, or closed but well documented - and I don't see why we'd want it different for models.
A bunch of these columns are outright absurd TBH, to the extend I'm not sure the author really knows what FOSS is about. What's open API access even supposed to be - API access is closed by definition.
Also there has never been a requirement that open source software needs to be documented - and for good reason - so I'm not a fan of the documentation column as well.
How do you block them automatically?
However, it also uses halium and libhybris. That means you can't just install your favourite distro and upstream tools. Everything that needs GPU acceleration needs to be patched for libhybris. For example, that means no upstream wlroots - and the latest patched version I think is 0.12 or so.
Actually, no, this seems to work on a very different principle.
Not really. It seems to use a very different technology from termux.
I'm confused... Aren't HOA reps elected by the people living in the HOA? And generally, democracy should work better on a local level where people know each other, not worse... So why do they fail so bad?
It has AI elements already, such as a page translator.
I like the idea, but I really hate that they've hardcoded the provider.
I'm somewhat skeptical. What if LetsEncrypt decided to misbehave tomorrow? Would the browsers have the guts to shut it down and break all sites using it?
It seems to me like a MITM hacker can just redirect all requests to a Blockchain node towards their malicious node.
Actually, that's not quite as clear.
The conventional wisdom used to be, (normal) porn makes people more likely to commit sexual abuse (in general). Then scientists decided to look into that. Slowly, over time, they've become more and more convinced that (normal) porn availability in fact reduces sexual assault.
I don't see an obvious reason why it should be different in case of CP, now that it can be generated.
How do you declaratively apply the configuration? Is that a feature of Kvaesitso?
Good point. I'd try to grep for something like [Bb3][Ee3]g[Ii1][nη]\w+<and so on> but I just know I'll miss something
How does L4sBot choose which articles to post?
This is a meta-question about the community - but seeing how many posts here are made by L4sBot, I think it's important to know how it chooses the articles to post.
I've tried to find information about it, but I couldn't find much.
Licenses for LLM models
I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding of a license is that it gives me permission to use/distribute something that's otherwise legally protected. For instance, software code is protected by copyright, and FOSS licenses give me the right to distribute it under some conditions.
However, LLMs are produced by a computer, and aren't covered by copyright. So I was hoping someone who has better understanding of law to answer some questions for me:
-
Is there some legal framework that protects AI models, so that I'd need a license to distribute them? How about using them, since many licenses do restrict use as well.
-
If the answer to the above is no: By mentioning, following and normalizing LLM licenses, are we essentially helping establish the principle that we do need permission from companies to use their models, and that they have the right to restrict us?