Well, that's depressing. :(

https://codeberg.org/small-hack/open-slopware

List of #FOSS projects using #slop (yes, including the Linux kernel and of COURSE systemd)

#NoAI

open-slopware

Free/Open Source Software tainted by LLM developers/developed by genAI boosters, along with alternatives. Fork of the repo by @gen-ai-transparency after its deletion.

Codeberg.org

@rl_dane

Linux is primarily a tool for fortune-500 companies first, and end-users like thee and me, last.

Given the fact that most Linux contributors are on a corporate payroll, no surprise.

Computing as we knew it, is dead. The future has been robbed from us.

@jns

OBI-WAN: That boy was our last hope.
YODA: No. There is another.

I mean, there's always the BSDs, Haiku, heck, the Commodore 64 is back, so anything can happen. ;)

@rl_dane Hah :) Haiku gives me some hope. They do actively resist the ai nonsense, so far,...

The c64 might be the better way to go :D

Anything that needs to be general purpose enough to work with modern hardware is always going to be disadvantaged by having to reverse engineer proprietary drivers and hardware.

There used to be enough people to somewhat keep up with that, and some shift in mentality at the manufacturer side to be a bit more reasonable with providing open drivers and/or documentation, but in the past few years or so, none of that is true anymore.

I am seeing projects long considered stable fall apart due to losing maintainers left and right, and projects that are still alive get flooded with new developers pushing bad practices as if it were a personal crusade. The software landscape in general seems to be slowly unraveling into complete dysfunction.

Sticking with an as-simple-as-possible stack where all parts can be maintained by one person seems like the most reasonable way out of the mess. (there's more capable options other than a c64 these days though ;) - reviving something like Wirth's project oberon on a somewhat more modern fpga would be a fun start.. )

Collapse OS β€” Bootstrap post-collapse technology

@rl_dane @jns CollapseOS is the one with the restrictive licencing, no?

@mirabilos @jns

Doesn't seem so:

collapseos-again $ head COPYING GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 3, 29 June 2007 Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc. <http://fsf.org/> Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed. Preamble The GNU General Public License is a free, copyleft license for
@jns @rl_dane yes, very restrictive, won’t touch

@mirabilos @jns

I need to spend some time to sit down and read/process the very thoughtful email Michael Dexter wrote me a couple years ago w.r.t. BSD licensing. (I was going to make it into a blog post, but then ran out of time due to family medical stuff).

I don't totally understand the #BSD licensing mindset. In a historical perspective, I totally get it, as it was a University project, but I don't personally understand why a person wouldn't want their license to basically say, "don't use this code to abuse human beings."

Tried to avoid overly rhetorical and drum-beating language in the previous paragraph to limited success. πŸ˜…

@rl_dane @jns

their license to basically say, "don't use this code to abuse human beings.

No FOSS licence can say so, you know.

@mirabilos @jns

I understand that FOSS is against restricting use (especially non-commercial restrictions), but I thought the thrust of the #GPL v3 was to fight against the "TiVOization" of Linux (making a closed product from open components).

@rl_dane @jns GPLv3 was never about Linux, they made that clear from the beginning

@mirabilos @jns

I know Torvalds was against it, but what was the point of it, then?

I always heard rms talking about it in the context of "TiVOization."