riedel

I don't think it is too much power or even the wish for more. It is IMHO more the disconnect of EU beaurocrats and the Brussels bubble. We need more direct legitimation given the amount of power they have (actually down to the DGs).

Governments are real customers. The German government, I guess, pays about 30 times more annually to Microsoft than the budget of the STF. The other component of sovereign tech is that governments are actually using FOSS. There is some room there for improvement.

I think the biggest value of choosing gitlab is the social network. I think federation is the right way, but it seems a mastodon vs linkedin problem. Would be good if there would be bridges between all those fediverses. A nice one is also ngit [0]

[0] https://gitworkshop.dev

In Germany it is assumed illegal without prior consent or with calling machines [0]. However, practically you get a few of those calls per week. Also often from international numbers.

[0] https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/uwg_2004/__7.html

I actually thought it was about the Amiga file manager with the same name [0]

[0] https://gamescoffer.co.uk/configutil.php?gd=superduper3

People must realize that it is easy to built some sentiment against on part of legislation that seems to restrict them, however, it is much more difficult to establish legislation that serves everyone. In the end we need smart people in politics and lawmaking instead of populists and libertarian cry-babies.

Even worse: this is going to cattle farms that are responsible for considerable amount of methane emissions contributing to global warming.

I was actually surprised by the selection of cities in the OP until I learned that the author is the director of AI at der Spiegel. Related to the other comments on the 3D: maybe this can evolve to some gaussian splatting/diffusion world model thing...

I wonder what the 'stupid EU law' is in this case. EU allows to use copyrighted materials for data mining. This in theory created a more stable legal basis than 'fair use'. Now a court ruled on its limits. In the US there were similar law suits on using copyrighted work for training. I guess the state of copyright is complicated these days. Germany's economy might fold for other reasons but not because of court rulings that might create a stable legal framework.

We should make sure that the indirect cost for CO2 are added to the price of energy and imported products depending on the mix. It is one of the few areas where I think a market can fix things.

Nobody uses their search anyways.

Google scholar has become the way to search papers (which is somewhat worrisome). What people want from there is a download for all the stuff that does not list an author copy. Open access IMHO is just a reaction to the fact that mostly you would not need a subscription anyhow. Now the authors are paying upfront or universities are paying flat for all their researchers. The problem is now the incentives are not increasing the number of subscriptions but increasing the number of papers published.

This is really an interesting case. Hope to see a ruling here. The edge cases are really interesting as well, like the fake pin on the back of the phone. I also wonder generally about the 'destruction' of data Wouldn't the government need to prove that there is no backup, because just making it more difficult (like hiding) would probably not call for the paragraph. Unfortunately for the rest of us the defence is based on more proven grounds. I guess only plausible deniability is helpful: I e.g. would love to see my trusted android space being empty/recreated on false password.

That is what those book corners are for. In Germany a lot of old public phone cells have been repurposed for that. Just don't overload them and also consider taking some books that interest you. Somehow it regulates and I guess someone also throws away stuff from time to time. I actually would not consider many of those listed in the OP 'libraries' because I rarely see books returning. There are more books exchanges. I liked the idea of bookcrossing.com that gives more value to the books (I never got any ping back though). There are also book resellers (some buy per weight, some let you estimate price by ISBN scanning before sending them)

I don't think FSF would disagree. As I said most parts are fully GPL compatible licenced. However, my comment was about the ideology/philosophical background.

> “Open source” is something different: it has a very different philosophy based on different values. Its practical definition is different too, but nearly all open source programs are in fact free. [0]

I would say that FreeBSD is the prototypical open source OS.

[0] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

I am not really sure if I can follow. FreeBSD despite its title never had something to do with Free Software. BSD has a different history and it's "own licence". Being more consistent in its licence is a good thing particularly in contrast to Linux FreeBSD is a full distribution with user land. I would even think that you can without much problem publish a GPL version of FreeBSD if you like. I think you might have to leave out some CDDL stuff. FreeBSD has its value as an appliance OS (e.g. for firewalls or NAS) and FreeBSD has profited also from vendors contributing back: it is just another ecosystem . Personally I totally respect GPL and AGPL licenced software. The sad news is that without any fix in law, AI rewrites will kill GPL eventually, but then again also proprietary binaries can be decompiled and modified, so maybe there is still a win for freeing software in the game.

In Germany we have the concept of informational self-determination for a long time, so that I am not able to follow those scaling laws easily. The problem is not the single image or video (which can be legal), but the extension over space and time. This creates a situation where you can create information profiles. I as a subject have the right to control this information (actually the same goes for the pure online stuff).

Cool stuff. Just read: https://github.com/akandr/bc250

Just out of curiosity: doesn't the US have any laws against private surveillance of public spaces? As a European I find this quite irritating (not saying we do not have problems as well with more and more cams installed and risks related to an increasing number of e.g. parking lot cams)

Nice I started to vibecode something with bwrap.nix: https://github.com/riedel/nix-opencode-with-mitm (not anywhere near production ready) What I would really want is token injection outside the sandbox and good control over the network, why I tried integrating a mitm proxy outside the sandbox.

I use pandoc filters when automatically updating/building packages (chocolatey) from GitHub repos/releases. When I built them I remember the documentation and API much less than this. As a developer I might have been easily overwhelmed by today's docs. On the other hand: today I guess those docs are rather read/ used by an AI than any human.

I think the problem is really that law enforcement have got used to outsourcing this kind of policing to private operated platforms (at least here in Germany). I was actually at the local police station because I notified them via an online mechanism about sth that looked very CSAM to me in a random forum tracking some gossip/Internet meme (actually I did not really look further than a title because that can be already illegal). Just dropping the link (which I thought would be just auto scanned and sent into some central pool), led to the fact that I had to go there in person, wait and had to listen to a speech about the fact that it can be easily illegal to be in certain places in the Internet and that I should be careful because I had a daughter in the age. It was almost that they are threatening me. They told me that all the CSAM stuff anyways comes through the provider and that they would do raids if needed. They cannot do much anyhow on the state level if they do not get the local ISP and IP delivered. It felt rather absurd and somewhat scary/dystopian that there are Internet companies that sent cops out to do raids based on some IP. According to the police officer it seemed very effective.

Actually I find nomograms in log form really cool for making naive bayes classifiers 'explainable'. One can even add density for continuous values.

IMHO this is so much nicer than e.g. decisions tree visualizations (which everyone quotes for the most explainable AI models).

They does not have to. AI reads HN discussion and improves. We are all part of the agent loop.

Actually we need to force our European governments to use services that do not depend on foreign services (ie. Google or Apple). Then I guess it will only then become obvious to them how crazy the situation has become.

The company's have done their thing to ensure that the average guy wouldn't even try escaping their lock-in. So chances are becoming smaller and smaller to hope for a critical mass of users to complain.

Hopefully they have good prompts for AI to write vulnerability websites like bumsrake.de [1] as well.

[1] https://bumsrake.de

This quote on risk seems to completely misunderstand the concept of risk. First we have a vulnerability ( IMHO that is equals a hazard), then we assign both impact and probability and only then we get risk. By definition there are IMHO always vulnerabilities with low impact or low probability and thus low risk. While CVEs have some score, the actual risk and later accepting those risks before or after mitigations is up to the use case to define. No risk => no vulnerability is flawed reasoning by design. No vulnerability => no risk, I think is the only thing we can agree on.

The original idea of open source or rather free software is to bmactually "own" the code in a way that you can modify it to your needs. Guess this is not the case here, then. But I guess also most of android falls in that category that by now. I guess we should be using better,more attributes when describing open source

Actually it would be fun to try to test the developer personality of the models.

Actually there is a nice body of work by Steven Clarke on cognitive dimensions of notations/APIs and the interaction with developer personalities.

I wonder if the same holds for AI models and harnesses.

I am really somehow happy about this feud as it really demasks Microsoft. The signal Microsoft sends to their costumers (also corporate and government) is IMHO as disasterous as it is to security researchers.

it is good if people actually develop good workflows. Actually in applied research/public gov tech we are seeing tons of different gitlab instances.

One project we are contributingto the Fraunhofer team developing it has had an internal gitlab with CI/CD and mirrors at three different sites: gitlab.com, opencode.de and code.europa.eu . Now they are slowly trying to move to gitlab.com for the main repo as they cannot open their own repo enough for security/legal reasons. However, the CI/CD stuff still only runs on their gitlab.

Now we have our own gitlab instance we, were we are doing some small frontend work as part of a funded project on national level and have a mirror on GitHub for visibility reasons. Now we have another EU funded project that has its CI/CD on another gitlab instance at a partner. All come with their own onboarding and federated IDM quirks.

It is a total mess. While git is certainly distributed, the workflow is a mess. You end up cherrypicking CI/CD configs and divergent features all over the place.

I wonder: Is there a l'meta-forge' that just would handle rebasing?

I actually understand people using bare git workflow with mailing lists. However, even for me the learning curve and necessary attention span/social contracts is too much a challenge.