Jayjader

J'ignore comment rendre justice à l'expérience qu'à été ma lecture de ce livre.

Dévoré en quelques jours. Le dernier tiers en particulier m'a retenu éveillé jusqu'à 3h du matin, le récit tellement fort que je ne pouvais me convaincre d'attendre le lendemain pour le terminer.

Un certain ressenti de découvrir le livre que j'aurais écrit, dans une autre vie, si j'avais choisi un parcours "littéraire" et non "scientifique". Un renouveau de rage écologique maintenu sous contrôle, presque étouffé, par un calme fataliste qui n'est pas pour autant un lâcher-prise. Si Les Soulèvements De La Terre était une religion ceci serait sans doute un de leurs textes sacrés, et Powers un de leurs prophètes (bien que Bouddha serait plus apte comme label). Heureusement, ce n'est pas une religion, et ce livre n'est pas un texte divin. Au contraire, je le trouve profondément profane, et humain.

Au-delà du "contenu" (cad les thèmes abordés, les arcs narratifs et péripéties suivi(e)s) la forme est remarquable. Powers écrit avec un style de narration qui, tel la conduite d'une auto à boite de vitesse dans une contrée vallonnée, change de trajectoire et d'allure dès qu'on a avancé une centaine de mètres. Et tout comme cette conduite, l'expérience qui en ressort n'est pas une succession d'interruptions qui nous laisse sur le qui-vive, mais un état de conscience profonde qui s’imprègne simultanément de chaque détail séparé et du mouvement de l'ensemble. Il y a des phrases qui donnent l'impression que le livre entier a été écrit et construit autour d'elles.

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27Arbre-monde

cross-posted from: https://jlai.lu/post/10771034

n’hésitez-pas à me demander de traduire certains passages de mon post en français si besoin

Personal review:

A good recap of his previous writings and talks on the subject for the first third, but a bit long. Having paid attention to them for the past year or two, my attention started drifting a few times. I ended up being more impressed with how much he's managed to condense explaining "enshittification" from 45+ minutes down to around 15.

As soon as he starts building off of that to work towards the core of his message for this talk, I was more-or-less glued to the screen. At first because it's not exactly clear where he's going, and there are (what felt like) many specific court rulings to keep up with. Thankfully, once he has laid enough groundwork he gets straight his point. I don't want to spoil or otherwise lessen the performance he gives, so I won't directly comment on what his point is in the body of this post - I think the comments are better suited for that anyways.

I found the rest to be pretty compelling. He rides the fine line between directionless discontent and overenthusiastic activist-with-a-plan as he doubles down on his narrative by calling back to the various bits of groundwork he laid before - now that we're "in" on the idea, what felt like stumbling around in the dark turns into an illuminating path through some of the specifics of the last twenty to forty years of the dynamics of power between tech bosses and their employees. The rousing call to action was also great way to end and wrap it all up.

I've become very biased towards Cory Doctorow's ideas, in part because they line up with a lot of the impressions I have from my few years working as a dev in a big-ish multinational tech company. This talk has done nothing to diminish that bias - on the contrary.

cross-posted from: https://jlai.lu/post/10771035, https://jlai.lu/post/10771034

Personal review:

A good recap of his previous writings and talks on the subject for the first third, but a bit long. Having paid attention to them for the past year or two, my attention started drifting a few times. I ended up being more impressed with how much he's managed to condense explaining "enshittification" from 45+ minutes down to around 15.

As soon as he starts building off of that to work towards the core of his message for this talk, I was more-or-less glued to the screen. At first because it's not exactly clear where he's going, and there are (what felt like) many specific court rulings to keep up with. Thankfully, once he has laid enough groundwork he gets straight his point. I don't want to spoil or otherwise lessen the performance he gives, so I won't directly comment on what his point is in the body of this post - I think the comments are better suited for that anyways.

I found the rest to be pretty compelling. He rides the fine line between directionless discontent and overenthusiastic activist-with-a-plan as he doubles down on his narrative by calling back to the various bits of groundwork he laid before - now that we're "in" on the idea, what felt like stumbling around in the dark turns into an illuminating path through some of the specifics of the last twenty to forty years of the dynamics of power between tech bosses and their employees. The rousing call to action was also great way to end and wrap it all up.

I've become very biased towards Cory Doctorow's ideas, in part because they line up with a lot of the impressions I have from my few years working as a dev in a big-ish multinational tech company. This talk has done nothing to diminish that bias - on the contrary.

cross-posted from: https://jlai.lu/post/10771034

Personal review:

A good recap of his previous writings and talks on the subject for the first third, but a bit long. Having paid attention to them for the past year or two, my attention started drifting a few times. I ended up being more impressed with how much he's managed to condense explaining "enshittification" from 45+ minutes down to around 15.

As soon as he starts building off of that to work towards the core of his message for this talk, I was more-or-less glued to the screen. At first because it's not exactly clear where he's going, and there are (what felt like) many specific court rulings to keep up with. Thankfully, once he has laid enough groundwork he gets straight his point. I don't want to spoil or otherwise lessen the performance he gives, so I won't directly comment on what his point is in the body of this post - I think the comments are better suited for that anyways.

I found the rest to be pretty compelling. He rides the fine line between directionless discontent and overenthusiastic activist-with-a-plan as he doubles down on his narrative by calling back to the various bits of groundwork he laid before - now that we're "in" on the idea, what felt like stumbling around in the dark turns into an illuminating path through some of the specifics of the last twenty to forty years of the dynamics of power between tech bosses and their employees. The rousing call to action was also great way to end and wrap it all up.

I've become very biased towards Cory Doctorow's ideas, in part because they line up with a lot of the impressions I have from my few years working as a dev in a big-ish multinational tech company. This talk has done nothing to diminish that bias - on the contrary.

Personal review:

A good recap of his previous writings and talks on the subject for the first third, but a bit long. Having paid attention to them for the past year or two, my attention started drifting a few times. I ended up being more impressed with how much he's managed to condense explaining "enshittification" from 45+ minutes down to around 15.

As soon as he starts building off of that to work towards the core of his message for this talk, I was more-or-less glued to the screen. At first because it's not exactly clear where he's going, and there are (what felt like) many specific court rulings to keep up with. Thankfully, once he has laid enough groundwork he gets straight his point. I don't want to spoil or otherwise lessen the performance he gives, so I won't directly comment on what his point is in the body of this post - I think the comments are better suited for that anyways.

I found the rest to be pretty compelling. He rides the fine line between directionless discontent and overenthusiastic activist-with-a-plan as he doubles down on his narrative by calling back to the various bits of groundwork he laid before - now that we're "in" on the idea, what felt like stumbling around in the dark turns into an illuminating path through some of the specifics of the last twenty to forty years of the dynamics of power between tech bosses and their employees. The rousing call to action was also great way to end and wrap it all up.

I've become very biased towards Cory Doctorow's ideas, in part because they line up with a lot of the impressions I have from my few years working as a dev in a big-ish multinational tech company. This talk has done nothing to diminish that bias - on the contrary.

cross-posted from: https://jlai.lu/post/10083697

Haven't bought the game yet, but these instructions seem legit. I found this link in a ProtonDB comment who claims to be its author/hoster: https://www.protondb.com/app/1934680#WRxwBwtv-Y.

Je n'ai pas encore acheté le jeu, mais les instructions m'inspirent confiance. J'ai trouvé ce lien dans le commentaire d'une personne sur ProtonDB qui prétend en être l'auteur (ou au moins l’hébergeur) : https://www.protondb.com/app/1934680#WRxwBwtv-Y.

Par hasard, il-y-aurait des jlailutines ou -lutins qui ont le jeu et sont sur Linux qui pourraient témoigner ?

Comme l'indique le titre, je recherche une BD francophone dont la trame principale est l'invasion d'une ville par une plante qui pousse à une vitesse foudroyante. Il y a des fortes chances que la ville soit Paris, mais il se peut que ça soit une autre ville.

Autres détails dont je me souviens:

• la plante en question ressemble surtout à des vignes ou lianes vertes (pas d'ecorce, pas de brun)
• vers la fin on apprend que c'est une botaniste qui est à l'origine de la plante :
  • grosso merdo elle explique que la plante crèvera toute seule au bout de 2-3 jours en se désintégrant,
  • que les baies de cette plante sont comestibles par les éventuelles personnes coincées par les lianes,
  • et que le tout est censé être un acte radical de sensibilisation écologique infligé de force au reste du monde en mode "rappelez-vous que c'est la nature qui domine, pas l'Homme"

Ce dont je suis à moitié certain :

• cette botaniste est la mère du protagoniste, un jeune garçon ado
• la BD est parue dans les numéros d'une revue de jeunesse dans les années 200X/201X - type astrapi, okapi, j'ai lu, ou peut-être encore sciences et vie junior

Je l'ai lue en tant que gamin à sa sortie, et ça m'avait bien marqué. Il n'y a que récemment que je me suis rendu compte que c'était une belle pièce de propagande écoterroriste!

Du coup j'aimerai essayer de la relire, en l'analysant explicitement en tant que tel 😈

Seems relevant to this community (albeit I haven't listened to the podcast yet).

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/15928804

We are excited to announce the launch of a new podcast showcasing the transformative power of “Open Source for Climate” and the people and stories behind it. The open source movement is the key to bringing trusted knowledge, technology and collective action.

Post-listen edit: a bit short and underwhelming. Then again, it seems to be more of an intro/announcement than a first "proper" episode. Hopefully the next one will be more fleshed out.

The closer I look, the more depressed I get.

First of all, the entire thing feels off. Quoting one commenter:

So this seems to be some kind of universal package manager where most of the content is AI generated and it's all tied into some kind of reverse bug bounty thing thing that also has crypto built in for some reason? I feel like we need a new OSS license that excludes stuff like this. Imagine AI-generated curl | bash installers 🤮

The bug bounty thing in question apparently being tea.xyz. From what I can tell, the only things actually being AI-generated are descriptions and logos for packages as an experimental web frontend for the registry, not package contents nor build/distribution instructions (thank god).

Apparently pkgx (the package manager in question) is being built by the person who created brew. I leave it up to the reader's sensibilities to decide whether this is a good or bad omen for the project itself.

Now we get to the actual sneer-worthy content (in my view): the comments given by a certain user for whom it seems PKGX is the best thing since sliced bread, and that any criticism of using AI for the project's hosted content is just and who thinks we should all change our preferences and habits to accommodate this

PKGX didn't (and still doesn't) have a description and icon/logo field. However, from beginning (since when it was tea), it had a large number of packages (more than 1200 now). So, it would have been hard to write descriptions and add images to every single package. There's more than just adding packages to the pantry. PKGX Pantry is, unlike most registries, a fully-automated one. But upstreams often change their build methods, or do things that break packaging. So, some areas like a webpage for all packages get left out (it was added a lot later). Now, it needed images and descriptions. Updating descriptions and images for every single package wouldn't be that good. So, AI-based image and description generation might be the easiest and probably also the best for everyone approach. Additionally, the hardwork of developers working on this project and every Open-Source project should be appreciated.

I got whiplash from the speed at which they pivot from arguing "it would have been hard for a human to write all these descriptions" to "the hardwork of developers working on this projet [...] should be appreciated". So it's "hard" work that justifies letting people deal with spicy autocomplete in the product itself, but less hard than copying the descriptions that many of these projects make publicly available regardless??? Not to mention the packaged software probably has some descriptions that took time and effort to make, that this thing just disregards in favor of having Stochastic Polly guess what flavor of cracker it's about to feed you.

When others push back against AI-anything being so heavily involved in this package registry project, we get the next pearl of wisdom (emphasis mine):

But personally I think, a combination of both AI and human would be the best. Instead of AI directly writing, we can maybe make it do PR (for which, we'll need to add a description field). The PR can be reviewed. And if it's not correct, can also be corrected. That's just my opinion.

Surely the task of reviewing something written by an AI that can't be blindly trusted, a task that basically requires you to know what said AI is "supposed" to write in the first place to be able to trust its outpu, is bound to always be simpler and result in better work than if you sat down and wrote the thing yourself.

Icing on the cake, the displayed profile name for the above comment's author is rustdevbtw. Truly hitting as many of the "tech shitshow" bingo squares as we can! (no shade intended towards rust itself, I really like the language, I just thinking playing into cliques like this is not great).

My original post title was going to be something a bit more sensational like "Bored of dealing with actual human package maintainers? Want to get in on that AI craze? Use an LLM to generate descriptions for curl-piped-to-bash installations scraped from the web!" but in doing my due diligence I see the actual repo owner/maintainer shows up and is infinitely more reassuring with their comments, and imo shows a good level of responsibility in cleaning up the mess that spawned from this comments section on that github issue.