Rather than banning AI tools in development, the correct approach is to change how submissions are handled in open source projects.

What kind of recommendation do you have here that doesn’t devolve to, like, closed source?

Open source requires a community that is transparently involved in the process and have equal rights to fork the code. There’s really no way around this, the license grants the right for anyone to fork as long as they adhere to the license.

Sad truth is that AI has effectively killed open source unless maintainers are willing to make a clear stance for AI:0 submissions only. Otherwise, the endless pull requests are far too hard to maintain as a single individual. And we certainly don’t want code being accepted by AI systems without human certification, especially in something as fundamental as an OS kernel.

I’m a bit confused. Is this the OOT port Ship of Harkinian or a different port?

I guess I’ll have to check it out again. Last time I used it a few years ago it just wasn’t exactly right on that front. But if it’s within scope to use it as an image grid, I might provide feedback and changes upstream if it’s close enough to the end result I want.

I’d love linkwarden to have a feature for image-links. I really need a substitute for pinterest that will cache a version of the image locally but still preserve the link to the page in question (so I can find the author/photographer/whathave you).

No volumes mounted and yes, it’s using the podman backend. Just double checked it wasn’t using the docker one.

OK now this would make some sense but would definitely be a bit of a show stopper for me. I’ll give it a try though.

Edit: Unfortunately this didn’t solve the issue. I thought it did for a minute, but it was the browser cache I think auto-filling the correct result.

I think I have uids set up, but I’m not positive they’re set up correctly.

Here’s an example of /etc/subuid for example, with it a bit anonymised for my specific user setup:

core:524288:65536
syncthing:589824:65536
userA:655360:65536
userB:720896:65536
userC:786432:65536

Syncthing in this case isn’t running any podman containers, all sharing is done bare-metal. userA is working, but userB and userC do look like they’re configured “correctly” at first glance. podman system info seems to be outputting the results above

  idMappings:
    gidmap:
    - container_id: 0
      host_id: 1101
      size: 1
    - container_id: 1
      host_id: 786432
      size: 65536
    uidmap:
    - container_id: 0
      host_id: 1101
      size: 1
    - container_id: 1
      host_id: 786432
      size: 65536

Note: The user in question here is uid 1101, another new user I created for testing purposes.

I mean, I might be wrong, but this only changes the mapping right? In the case that user broke containment, I would assume that they would have the user id of the user that’s running the process?

Granted this is all in theory so I’m not sure exactly – that might be a perfectly reasonable way to do it.

As far as I understand, it should as it’s embedded inside the actual image file and not mounted.

I’m having other strange behaviour on non-1000 uid accounts. For example, running docker.io/library/httpd using the podman examples page on an account that isn’t userid 1000 will create an issue where it complains that libgcc_0 isn’t installed. This works flawlessly on the uid 1000 user.

It does make me think that something needs to be configured for non-uid 1000 users on podman. This is not replicable on arch linux on my raspberry pi, fwiw.

Uh oh, looks like someone’s AI company is running out of money and needs people back on Twitter. 😭

Everything he does is for X reason…

This logic is awful because it forgets the quintessential truth: He has no plan and he’s an absolute moron.

Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction. The United States elected a man with the mental capacity of a 5th grader… Twice!

Reverse surgeries? I’m trying to think what that means literally and I’m not really sure – isn’t a reverse surgery a dissection? 😧

Any interested in making this a federated search?

I’ve been toying with the idea of a web-ring style search engine where it uses the fediverse’s post and sub system so that you can subscribe to “indexers” that are made by other users (or even mastodon users themselves) so that you can have highly targeted search engine systems. So, for example, you could make multiple search “scopes” and each of those scopes would follow specific other “sources” and search from them. Likewise, users could provide links and descriptions to add new entries to each scope which would, in essense, work like a fediverse post and then be distributed to all other interested parties.

I haven’t done a lick of implementation yet, but thought I’d share the idea here as I consider doing this more and more every day. The only thing I haven’t figured out yet is images, because ideally that would be a special type of scope view.