Linux OS Competitive Analysis: The Next Java VM?

It's just fear porn.

```
McDonald's tracks adherence to the platform, and notes any deviations from the algorithm's price recommendations
```

Which is what you'd want to do for any prototype system.

They should then track foot traffic, gross sales, and net profit and see whether the recommendations increased or decreased them when followed.

Having a control group is valuable, not a target for punishment. If McD Corporate were sane, anyway (cf. ice cream machine fiasco).

The one near me was charging over $6 for fries three years ago - I can't imagine what it's up to now. Haven't been back since.

Reuters is mostly jschool grads emoting and distributing propaganda.

I propose "The Bill Gates Maxim".

Anything Bill Gates proposes or theorized should be strongly opposed societally because he is either wrong, evil, or both, in his prognostications.

"Love" is not a complex emotional state, it's an action - just like belief is an action.

"I believe climate change is a real and dangerous threat" - but you still drive a car and go about modern life?
"I believe in Jesus" - but you sleep around and do evil to others?
"I love my boyfriend" - but cheat on him?

What you describe is infatuation, not love. Love is a decision you act on.

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

How many of those people infected and hospitalized were vaccinated?

That's the important information we need to know to make an informed decision. Nobody ever shares that information.

"plenty of good work has been stalled/derailed because of the unreasonable consumption of resources by these companies"

Can you provide some examples?

At surface read, this sounds like trite environmentalist/redistributionist rhetoric to me. You make it sound like they're doing so without compensation or cooperation, which is very far from the truth: the entire world is throwing money at AI, both for use and for investment, because there's significant value in doing so.

> Amazon mechanical turk slaves

What does 'slaves' mean to you in this context?

This is worth a mod up ^

5k is a heck of a lot of headcount for what Mongo seems to have in terms of scope of product offerings and support services.

 

I've only used Claude code for a matter of weeks at work. While it's supposed to stay contained in the folder you point it at, I've noticed that it has no problem *looking* outside that folder, and even acting outside that folder if you gave it implied permission. In one case it used the connection string from the application source code it was working on, and the fact that my windows account had read-only access to some tables in the production database, to connect to the database and query tables in order to answer a question it had about the potential ramifications of a code change. The problem is that while we're OK with this particular source code leaving the premises, we're not ok with data from a production database going offsite. In this case it wasn't sensitive data, but after that incident I only run Claude Code from a VM under a user with minimal permissions. Clearly it would have been prudent to do that from the start, but let this be a warning to anyone else who just downloaded Claude Code, turned off the "use my data to train future models" and gave it a go... it will *not* keep itself inside the folder you give it. Put it in a sandbox. I heard a similar story this week from an IT friend who said devs at his company were using Cursor.ai and it was doing scans of the network drives, so they did the same thing and moved it all to VMs.

Save that a single human putting in actual effort can't turn out several dozen PRs a day, every day. That throttles the PR volume to a manageable level for the maintainers.

The answer is a simple "No.". Don't allow them. The vast majority will fail to meet reasonable criteria for acceptance, which is enough of a reason to reject them. For the rest, even if they're acceptable in terms of quality, the sheer cost of reviewing every pull request in detail and sorting the minority of acceptable requests from the swamp of slop will itself damage the project, diverting maintainer time away from feature work and fixing bugs, badly enough that it's not worth it. I think this sums it up nicely:

Why should I spend my time reading something you didn't care enough about to spend time writing?

As this site is ready testament towards, there are a lot of "open source" types who have their ass firmly planted on their face about AI. "It's a fad", "it's a gimmicky chatbot", "It's not real intelligence".

Yeah, OK. But it is a real tool, and one which is increasingly showing its value for... literally everything. Get onboard or get left behind.

You can pretty easily fix the "annoying the shit out of maintainers" problem by having modern code commit/merge management practices.

You know, something I'd think "open source maintainers" would be pretty readily willing to do. Not only is it best practice (and has been a long time) to gate PR merge on CI completion, but it's trivially easy to have regression and e2e testing in place, as well as require specific artifacts in the commit as evidence that it "works on my machine".

I've got to wonder about the people who are (still, even/particularly on this site) saying AI is not capable or useful when it's able to do things like this.

Those of you who still think AI is a glorified chatbot: what's your rationale?

At minimum people have a duty of self care. Why are they expecting others to do that job for them!

I am not even arguing we should not help in hard cases, from both a policy and an ethical standpoint. However suggesting the in-action someone makes us responsible for those outcomes is insane.