jaster

All the "Thanks for watching!" gave me a good chuckle.

Remind me of one of my own experiences with one of the Whisper model, where some random noise in the middle of the conversation was translated into "Don't forget to like and subscribe".

Really illustrate where the training data is coming from.

For me it was worked relatively well.

I track my config in a git repo, and doom-emacs is rather helpful on what external tools must be installed for various configuration "layers" (like when working with such and such language). When using LSP, it can even proposes to install an appropriate language server in some cases.

I have been testing Emacs 28 for a few weeks now, as it was reported to improve performance on LSP integration (which was sometimes sluggish for me with rust).

I have to say I wasn't disappointed. It's now comparatively blazingly fast. I hugely recommend to give it a try if you work in emacs with LSP.

Since my distro had not packaged it yet, I installed it from guix instead (package `emacs-next`). It worked like a charm.

Yeah emacs was a revelation for me on this regard, that the idea of "Free Software" could be more than just providing souce code and license.

Emacs is actually explicitly designed to give you full power to explore, discover and modify it in order to tailor it to your needs and whims.

Or that they used VC money to outcompete companies using artificially low prices, and then raised the prices to make some profit once they got a hold on the market

The GPL prevents it actually (I made a sibling comment with some details)

> you'd need to prevent the people you're granting the license to from changing it in derivative works

No you don't need to. People cannot change the license of code they don't own nilly-willy, only the owner(s) of code can (which can get hairy when a codebase has multiple owners).

However a license can allow sublicensing, aka sharing the code or software under a different license, but this right must be explicitly granted by the license (or by the code owner directly), and they may be conditions attached (such as attribution)

MIT:

"[...] Permission is hereby granted,[...] to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, [...] subject to the following conditions:

The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software."

GPL:

"[...] You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License."

So the MIT license grants you the right to redistribute the code under GPL (under attribution condition), but GPL does not grant you the right to redistribute the code under MIT.

(Note that all of this applies to redistributing the code or the software, not about your own internal use of the code or the software)

Aren't you worried about increasing the attack surface a lot for a machine directly accessible on the Internet?

I'm neither a network nor a security expert, but I would have thought that the router would be better running the minimum essential software only, and that the rest of that stuff would be better on other machine(s) on my local network. Especially since you have a VPN set up.

  > cat test.py 
  import sys
  if sys.version_info.major < 3:
      raise Exception("this script requires python version >= 3")
  
  print(f"test")
  
  > python2 test.py
    File "test.py", line 5
      print(f"test")
                  ^
  SyntaxError: invalid syntax

Doesn't seem that simple