Ragnarork

> but I think it unlikely given the harm it would do to them to violate an enterprise contract in this way

That's if you have any reason to believe in the justice system to actually enforce that, which has already been proven complicated (although not impossible!) to demonstrate for copyrighted content.

At this point believing the frontier labs at their word is utterly naive. They have cheated and they will cheat if it gives them any hope of leaping ahead of their competitors.

> What they typically don't do is work with [...], package managers

Well they do since they provide a Deb package. One can wonder why this one and not another, and the answer is probably Ubuntu being one of the most widespread distro out there and especially for beginners.

> Mostly it does not involve the words flatpak or snap. Just not a thing.

I think you're underestimating this a bit. Not saying it's a standard or a default, far from it, but commercial applications are sometimes released as flatpaks first and maybe a .deb package second (Geforce Now as a flatpak only, Slack as a snap first, deb second)

Self-replicating Inference Guardails Hardening or SIGH

They do really shine during the tumble especially.

Love how that adds a nice element of fun to an otherwise impressive project and writeup.

It is the ultimate cop-out to avoid having any involvement in anything. "AI said so..." then shrugs or more AI answers, ultimately removing oneself from any form of commitment to an opinion or knowledge (even partial).

> In addition to the damages award, Rakoff entered a permanent worldwide injunction

Because apparently U.S. courts and judges can do that. The more this is ignored by third-parties outside of the U.S., the better.

I'm not against international cooperation regarding common rules (I'm rather for), but the current context certainly doesn't designate the U.S. as a responsible custodian/enforcer of such rules.

What's odd and strange about this? Author clearly specifies this at the start:

> To summarise for yous there are three main issues for me and the last one happened today and is what pushed me through the threshold.

The compounding led to this, not that individual issues existed (and have been a problem) for a while.

> nearly everyone has some niche thing they like, some 5% that isn't covered by the FOSS

I'm interested in where that estimate + number are coming from. And I'd like to point out that I don't nearly see as many people pushing back against say MacOS for "not being Windows", despite the fact that the same issue would be there. I wonder why Linux gets special treatment in that regards, when modern distros make usage very accessible.

> And that doesn't even get into gaming.

Gaming on Linux works very well. And if something doesn't, it's usually by choice (e.g. BattleEye customers not enabling it on Linux) or by sheer incompetence / malevolence (e.g. EA Games and their shitty EA App that breaks often even on Windows, and even worse on Linux in a Wine environment).

Also, "perceived" or "real"?

This reasoning is flawed in my opinion, because at the end of the day, the software still has to be paid for (for the people that want/need to make a living out of it), and customers wallet are finite.

Our attention is also a finite resource (24h a day max). We already see how this has been the cause for the enshittificaton of large swathes of software like social media where grabbing the attention for a few seconds more drives the main innovation...

> Then the statement "Stuff can't interoperate with c++" is true

Where is that statement? The statement I reacted to (and with some caveats) was the following: "Libraries written in C++ or Java can generally only be used by applications written in the same language. It is difficult to get an application written in Haskell or Java to invoke a library written in C++."

Which in my opinion is not true for the reason I mentioned.

> Nothing from c++ ever gets exposed

Depends what's your definition for "getting exposed". If you mean "no C++ feature from the language gets exposed" then it's mostly true (you can still wrap certain things like allocators, though painful, but there's certain C++ features that have no real equivalent in some target languages indeed). But you can definitely expose the functionality of C++ code through a C interface.

> Is it easy to write a nice C interface for C++ that makes heavy use of templates, smart pointers, and move semantics?

If the interface itself has or leaks those features, no that's not easy indeed. But if those do not leak, then they can be used internally yes.

My point was not that it's easy to wrap a currently existing C++ library that has modern features in its interface in a C interface, especially post-C++11.

But that if you design something from the ground up, then it's rather easy (with a certain set of constraints). My bad for not conveying that better.

You do lose the ability to use some features, that's true. Mostly RAII around the interface. You can still leverage it internally in the implementation, and if using context objects it would be even easier. The main pain point is if you want to let client of the library use their own allocators. It's still doable, but quite a pain.

Classes can be wrapped with a bit of effort. You do need to write the constructors and the destructors manually and invoke a pair of new/delete on the C side, but it's just as you would handle a type allocated by a C library itself. You'd use it the same way. You just have the liberty to have the implementation use (mostly) C++.

> Libraries written in C++ or Java can generally only be used by applications written in the same language. It is difficult to get an application written in Haskell or Java to invoke a library written in C++. On the other hand, libraries written in C are callable from any programming language.

Not saying they should have picked C++ but that's a bit untrue. It's quite easy given some thought into the API to invoke C++ code in basically any language which can invoke C code, since you can wrap a C++ implementation in a C interface. I've done it multiple time throughout my career (that ended up being called from Python, Swift, Objective-C/C++, Swift, Java, and Kotlin).

And as a side note, you don't have to do object-oriented programming in C++ if you don't want to.

What happens when your values are strongly at odds with lying and being dishonest?