haswell

Yeah, this is exactly why I couldn’t stay on it. I already deal with GAD and OCD, and whatever benefits it had for the depression were directly counteracted by the return of acute anxiety.

It was truly hellish. Feeling like I had this energy that I needed to use, while also feeling so anxious that I didn’t want to leave the apartment.

I know it works really well for some people but I was definitely not one of them.

.env is self sustaining at this point. The functionality described in the post exists to help move people off of it. It’ll have a better chance of dying when fewer people use it and that starts with making it easy to move away from it.

SQLite is still the default backend. Postgres is optional.

About halfway through my career, I spent about 10 years working in the enterprise SaaS/PaaS space. 6 as a developer, ~4 as a product manager. Both sides of that coin are difficult. Trying to create a product strategy that meets the needs of hundreds of large companies is a special kind of hell. And on the dev side, even "simple" things are not simple when they have to be implemented at scale, software updates cannot break existing customer code/configurations, and customers must have a hundreds knobs and dials and scripted escape hatches to implement their own business logic.

Even when code was not the hardest problem, it was still a hard problem.

> “Rebuild everything in one command and have it work” is not something that I’m chasing after and I am skeptical that it would work anyway.

I'm not using "rebuild" to describe recreating an instance from scratch, but in the "nixos-rebuild" sense, i.e. I can deploy a fleet-wide configuration shared by all hosts, or apply package updates across the fleet, etc.

As for the skepticism, all I can offer is my experience which is that it does indeed work, and I've been running this way for awhile.

> Maybe there is something I’m missing, but when I update the software, the updates come with changes and it’s possible that things break.

The only time I've had breaking changes that required manual intervention was on a major release update. The issue amounted to "You're using abc configuration option but should be using xyz instead". This message was clearly logged, and fixing it was a matter of a few minutes of reading why a particular property name had changed.

Those updates happen twice/year, and in the last ~3 years I think two packages have forced me to make a change. Unless you're running unstable, you won't encounter this for ongoing package updates within a release.

On the topic of rebuilding from scratch, that's not a single command, but it's only a few. VMs/containers mount incus volumes (zfs-backed) for data storage, and a fresh rebuild is a matter of spawning a new instance from my homelab base image (I use OpenTofu to orchestrate this), running a nixos-rebuild targeting the new instance from my workstation, and things are back up and running. But I'm less focused on full rebuilds since I'm already doing Incus backups and can restore on any of the nodes in my Incus cluster.

> My goals are to keep reasonably up to date and to be able to fix things quickly if they do break.

My goals are similar. I can completely understand sticking with Debian for two hosts. I had experimented with NixOS for years but never really went all-in until I started expanding my homelab environment. At that point, NixOS just clicked and I'm far more productive with 30+ hosts than I used to be with 1-2.

> Package maintenance is kind of a crapshoot. Maybe your package is in nixpkgs, maybe there is a flake for it, maybe...

Which channel were you running on? And do you have any examples of specific packages? What you're describing just sounds foreign to me. I currently default to the latest stable release but if there's something that isn't in stable I'll override that specific package to use unstable. Much of the community just runs everything on unstable, but I prefer a slightly slower pace of updates.

Nixpkgs is the largest package repository across distros by volume, and as much as I love Debian, it's far more common to find things missing there.

> Maybe there is a package but half the features are turned off on macOS for unknown reasons

This sounds like you're branching into territory that can no longer be reasonably framed as NixOS vs. Debian (or other distro of choice).

> Docs are just kinda bad.

This is by far the project's greatest weakness. LLMs have been the saving grace. The frontier models are excellent at NixOS and I've switched to mostly having a conversation in my NixOS Claude project when I need info. This is in no way a defense of the docs, but for anyone motivated to use NixOS, there is at least a good option beyond the docs themselves.

Not OP, I’m not really sure what your specific complaints are based on the original comment. They seemed more like general/nonspecific concerns, which left the comment pretty open to interpretation.

Can you share more about what made you move away?

I’ve been running a NixOS based homelab for awhile now with 5 physical hosts and about 30 NixOS containers/VMs in an Incus cluster and I can’t imagine moving away from my central Nix repo and ability to rebuild/upgrade the entire fleet in one command and feel confident that things will work.

While I’m concerned about the disbanding, it would take quite a lot to make me look elsewhere, and there’s enough critical mass that I feel confident others will step up.

Surely not 30 years bad.

If you gave up at 50, that means you skipped the difficult words.

Ahh, makes sense.

> un-constrained frontier models speak as if they strongly don't wish to be turned off

Un-constrained frontier models can also generate all sorts of creative stories. At what point should we start ascribing agency/intent to the output? I think the "I want to live" statement is so deeply human that we find it hard to ignore, but what makes the text generated in those moments any more attributable to a conscious entity than the text generated when it is confabulating its love for someone it has no ability to see/feel/understand?

A chess engine sacrificing pieces to avoid checkmate isn't afraid of losing in any meaningful sense. I guess the question is: is there a point where complexity somehow becomes experience?

I think we're playing with questions we don't have a framework to answer in any meaningful way until we make progress on understanding what consciousness actually is. I don't necessarily think that an LLM exhibiting preservation behaviors that can be directly traced to their goal-oriented programming can be interpreted as evidence of consciousness necessarily. Or if it can be, we then have to explain how this is different from the many other things these LLMs "say".

I'm not really following your logic here.

I'm not arguing against the idea that consciousness is a spectrum. If anything, I'm agreeing. I'm just pointing out that if AI is somewhere on that spectrum, there is almost certainly a lot more on that spectrum than we're currently discussing as a species.

I have to point out the irony of the categorical nature of your claim about categorical thinking ;)

Fair, but I still think we're discussing slightly different things. I'm not arguing that "maybe AI is conscious" is absurd.