jayofdoom

I get an AI prompt when I pull up to Taco Bell. I, and everyone else I've seen there, waits for the human to respond.

I will not place orders with robots. Give me a kiosk or give me a human.

This is great advice.

I love taking my 45 minute talks and recycling them into a smaller time format. People feel like they're getting a lot of information when you have to gloss over portions of it or skip entire sections.

I've given one talk of mine in about 5 different venues, and the 30 minute version (which was EXTREMELY truncated) got some of the best feedback, despite me feeling like I didn't cover anything.

I work on OpenStack, which is a project folks work on primarily due to sponsorship -- not many people who want to do security/stability work for a cloud "for the fun of it" :D.

So mentees I've worked with have usually come as part of a program, such as MLH[1] or Outreachy[2]. Other projects I've helped with mentoring have come from college programs or professors[3].

I have no idea how hard it is to get through the filters to get these opportunities; I know generally we ask them to only send us the best and that's worked out really well.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbsI8l-MaFA is an interview done on my podcast (by the other host, Tabatha) with CID, who works with me on OpenStack Ironic. A little over 2 years ago, he was an MLH fellow (https://fellowship.mlh.com/) working with me -- now he's a maintainer on OpenStack and working on my team. This is an exceptional outcome, but he's not the only person who has found success via MLH that I know.

[2] e.g. https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@...

[3] https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@...

Nothing. And that's the problem -- the issue isn't "should a contributor be able to use AI" it's quickly becoming "is this entire contributor an AI agent". Every actual-human who gets a bad first experience hurts the project. The contributors having to be suspicious of new people hurts the project. The whole thing just sucks, and I don't know how to fix it.

I use claude-code, but the AI ecosystem and some of the autonomous tooling coming out of it -- which some people "helpfully" use irresponsibly and point at OSS projects they aren't personally invested in -- enables a LARGE amount of abusive behavior towards open source projects. This is even before we get into how many infrastructural resources crawlers eat up.

Me, and most other OSS contributors, signed up to be a mentor, to create software, to work together ... not to be the equivalent of a reddit moderator banning AI agents left and right.

Honestly they kinda screwed over people -- like me -- who tried to avoid the MAX planes for a while. I'd specifically book around the MAX planes and then they would change equipment at the last minute into a MAX. There is no meaningful "knob" an aviation consumer can turn to express an aircraft preference, and given how US airspace works, you often don't have a meaningful choice in carrier (unless you're willing to take on extra stops).

Thunderbird has spun off from the usual Mozilla stuff. I would be shocked if they moved in this direction.

They sold >100,000 of them, including one to me. The F-150 Lightnings are coming off lease and are available used now for a reasonable price.

No, you don't support Linux. I just tried to download it and got a "coming soon". Please don't post misleading things to HN :(.

Kagi has a good rep; misleading comments like this hurts it.

It's pretty consistent. If you check out something from a Gentoo-official repo, it's going to have been created by humans without the use of LLM tooling. LLM tooling is used for the kernel, systemd, and a litany of other packages -- trying to run a "non-LLM OS" is more like a fork of the whole ecosystem than a distribution.

I can appreciate the concept that Gentoo is placing a high value on human curation. I used to be firmly against our anti-LLM policy, but honestly it's a pretty strong differentiator from other distributions -- and I'm getting more and more sick of AI tech in general.

(note: I am a Gentoo developer)

We've had similar issues with Openstack documentation in Google.

This workaround only applies to kernels with the impacted code compiled as a module. RHEL, Fedora, and Gentoo (we use a modified Fedora config) all are configured to build this in directly. Without a patch or config change (as Sam from Gentoo was alluding to), those distributions remain vulnerable.

These categories of vulnerability are not new: https://dgl.cx/2023/09/ansi-terminal-security -- any time you take any untrusted data and do literally anything with it, you're at risk.

I used this for a while. It doesn't display HTML emails just fine. It only supports a subset of stuff which -- as a geek is awesome because it protects me -- but would be hideous to give to a normal user. Literally less than half of my emails were readable.

There are over 600 different people contributing to OpenStack in a given six-month release cycle. Approximately 60% of total code by commit count is from Red Hat employees. I'm one of the 600 that don't work at Red Hat, and there are a lot of us.

You should get a sense of the scale of a project before summarily declaring that it has a single point of failure.

This is true, sadly -- but the documentation exists and community is friendly to those who wanna build those skills. It's extremely difficult to build something the size of OpenStack without making it so configurable that operating it needs a decoder ring. I'm doing everything I can in Ironic to make it more friendly and flexible out of the box, but it's a difficult problem to solve.

I always tell people: OpenStack can do almost anything you want... if you can configure it to do so :).

There's a reason I point out the longevity of OpenStack. As a project, it has significant corporate sponsorship and policies to ensure that one entity can't take over control of it. For instance; the OpenStack Technical Committee is never permitted to have a majority membership made up of a single entity's employees. This means that even though Red Hat, at this stage in it's development, has a majority of contribution, the project itself can never be taken over by a single entity.

People find project governance, and particularly "corporate" involvement in open source to be distasteful -- but in my experience, and OpenStack is a winning example of this -- setting up good boundaries to let companies work together has proven to be sustainable.

I'm saying not that OpenStack can replace LocalStack, but instead that LocalStack, by building a project on top of proprietary APIs, set themselves up to fail.

More reason to run your infrastructure using open source software in your own datacenter. OpenStack has been around for closing in on two decades, running clouds and being mostly governance-drama-free.

It's not surprising that a proprietary ecosystem built on open source software locked up behind a gate doesn't make a worthwhile ecosystem for building open source tooling against.

The only reason I run android over iOS is the freedom to install things I want on it. A waiting period is unacceptable as Android has proven that it can't be trusted not to tighten the grip further.

Reconsider.

I had the same thought, as an OpenStack developer as well (TBH I don't remember if my username here identifies me or not). Yeah, we can apply as an exceptional case, but realistically us being excluded shows the criteria is very much directed towards "github style" open source.

I used to go to a members-only bar in Apex, NC (in NC, at least at the time, if >50% of your sales was alcohol, you had to be a "club"). The last time I ever went there was when someone called the bartender and "reported" a DUI checkpoint down the road and they announced it in the bar.

Why do some folks think it's OK to put other people at risk to this level?

Hard agree. I have their doorbell and some of the wifi light fixtures (that go into mains power). They integrate great with home assistant and record locally.

Slackware has no package manager or installer. It's just an extra step removed.

I didn't say Gentoo has no package manager (it does; and it's great!)

Thanks for posting this! It's been a nice first year as a Gentoo developer. Everyone has been kind and helpful to me as I've been figuring things out.

I want to highlight something: Gentoo's developer onboarding system is EXCELLENT. Starting as an active member of the general community, you talk an existing developer into being your mentor and fill out an open book test ( https://projects.gentoo.org/comrel/recruiters/quizzes/ebuild... ) which later is graded/corrected in a couple of meetings which I'd equate to the "job interview". I wish more open source projects (including my own) had such well-documented, straightforward processes to gain commit access. I appreciated the process of doing the quiz as it helped me close gaps in my knowledge.

I always tell people this:

With Red Hat, Anaconda is the installer. With Ubuntu, ubiquity.

etc ...

With Gentoo -- YOU are the installer. This means you have to be ready to perform -- more or less manually -- many of the tasks automated in other distributions. I sorta see this as the same as a tutorial level in a video game: you learn how to read and follow the wiki which is essentially the key to success in Gentoo.

Gentoo is often at the forefront of identifying and helping resolve integration issues between different software projects, particularly when it comes to compiler tech (e.g. fixing packages so they can be built properly with LTO, or with LLVM as well as GCC) or other backend-detail-minutia which makes the whole system better without always being visible to the end user.

OP's statement matches my understanding; parts were gentoo-based at one point.

Honestly this is just sorta a Tuesday for an advanced Gentoo user? There are lots of ways to do this documented on the Gentoo wiki. Ask in IRC or on the Forum if you can't find it. "Catalyst" is the method used by the internal build systems to produce images, for instance https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Catalyst.

This is called "digital sovereignty", and it has been a major topic for OpenInfra foundation and other open source cloud foundations. Open source, and open cloud software, is the way to ensure your data can stay inside your own borders and be governed by your local laws. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lvz2PcHq0yY is one example of folks talking about this, but realistically you can find talks from OpenStack/OpenInfra going back 4/5 years on this topic.

In OpenStack, we explicitly document what our log levels mean; I think this is valuable from both an Operator and Developer perspective. If you're a new developer, without a sense of what log levels are for, it's very prescriptive and helpful. For an operator, it sets expectations.

https://docs.openstack.org/oslo.log/latest/user/guidelines.h...

FWIW, "ERROR: An error has occurred and an administrator should research the event." (vs WARNING: Indicates that there might be a systemic issue; potential predictive failure notice.)