serious_angel

    > But I knew I could take this even further! Why not recreate DiZZi itself, complete with its sassy personality, and have it roast my launches and Beyblading skills? After all, we live in the AI era...
    >
    > Source: https://blog.simone.computer/reverse-beyblade-launch-tracker

Thank you... thank you heartfelt... for not using that sorrowful, void-bloody awfully misused technology for more than that, at least...

Thank you actually achieving everything else yourself... with your own hands, your effort, your own attitude and unique ideas...

This is an actual achievement to keep safe in the history with a name on it! A name of an alive developer, artist, an infinitely miraculous individual who discovers, learns, and treasures even higher achievements!

This non-AI projects is an alive project... which is an achievement indeed... to learn from, to keep safe in the history, to return to eventually, and get inspiration from!

Thank you, dear Simone Marzulli!

Thank you! Of course! I do believe these cases are dreams for LLM vendors to advertize themselves regardless truth, and many believe trends over actual evidence...

Please do consider sharing the actual evidence to keep in the history, and respect actual human authors involved, their effort, time, and humane attitude... for discoveries, competition, actual achievements to learn from and get inspiration...

    > "Not every author is a narcissist, but they all want to be recognized… That's exactly what these scammers are targeting. They have identified a very, very lucrative niche."...
    > 
    > Writers are waiting "for somebody to read their writing," Hoy added. She argued that is why many writers believe the praise scammers heap on them. AI makes many of the compliments sound nuanced and personalized. Elderly authors are particularly vulnerable. As Hoy explained, a significant number of people who have a book in them leave off the writing until they have retired. Something else also kicks into the picture at this life stage: a sizable retirement fund...
    > 
    > ...the voices seemed human...
    > 
    > It is happening all over the world...

Holy gracious smokes... This is such a sorrow... Please... please... dear Artists, People... please don't give up! Please just do the miracle, your professional, ingenious, the invaluably precious, ineffably magnificent Art!

This "restriction" probably has more to do with the fact that these models are also "trained" on User/Human messages, so the more swearing/obscenities/vulgarity/profanity there are, in the trained material, the higher the chance these same models will include that same profanity in the output generated back to the Human.

    1. During registration at Ahtrophic's Claude website, there’s a "Help improve our AI models" checkbox that's checked by default (you "can" disable it in the settings);
    2. The Claude interface has an "incognito" mode;
    3. There is a free tier available, and as we know, when it's "free", then User themselves is the "product", to quote various CEOs, including Google's;

But, even with the checkbox disabled, I reckon nothing guarantees privacy.

In case of the "privacy", of course, systems like these that operate under a umbrella of liability are monitored 24/7 by dedicated teams, which is expected/normal for any reasonably popular service.

From a viewpoint of the algorithm's creator, this may seem awful, when your algorithm is getting much vulgar attitude, but let's be real here. You try making that algorithm talk to the human mimicking another human, and now limit the human within your own environment? A human who also pay you for an access, too? This feels unfair, or borderline near fashism, sorry...

Such algorithms are art under-the-hood, mathematically speaking, and are/should be respected, sure. But, it's ridiculous/dystopian to prohibit profanity against an algorithm, a bot with banish risks against alive human... It's simply inhumane to ban a Human for it, I believe. This is an algorithm that must support a Human - not judge it. Only a Human is supposed to judge another Human in person - this is live, fair, and humane.

Aren't we, infinitely miraculous human, are becoming slaves?

    1. Become more dependent on the AI vendors...
    2. Become more dependent on the AI, atrophy gradually
    3. Think less, pay more
    4. Pay more, think less
    5. Pay more
    6. Depend more
    7. Pay more
    8. Give everything to those who run DataCenters or have unlimited access to LLM/AI
    9. Become homeless
    10. Fail to support your own family
    11. Devalue and obliterate your art and history
    12. Devalue and obliterate human art and history
    13. Depend more
    14. Depend more
    15. Depend more...

This is so dear sorrowful...

Art is a conversation between two people, that is a timeless communication between human.

An artwork to realize... to surf within to learn from, to listen to, to realize someone's images, someone's ideas, someone's worries, someone's messages... someone...

Art is someone's work of life, their experience, their... love...

There's human time in art... in a book, article, painting, soundscape, film, video-game... there's alive time of other human who reified their life experience, views, ideas... in an artwork and passed it to the outer world... to be inscribed in the infinitely magnificent history...

This...? This is just, sorry, deadly awful, dreadful, dark, and dear pain in heart... This is also disrespectful towards the Artists, Developers, people who worked on the Universe and this exact artwork...

This is utterly sorrowful...

These ML/LLM/AI are systems where no one will ever be accountable for and guarantee its stability, safety, and its value.

ML/LLM/AI may be useful, but it must always be considered unauthorized, mistrust, experimental, unverified, always probable to fail on each iteration. Its data must always be accountably supervized by an alive human, who realizes responsibility, life, pain, art, effort, love... Always, even at 2999+ years/times. No life/pain/art/love is no sense/trust/confidence/respect/safety.

That is, it may be fun to play with as a toy, as any ML/LLM/AI based system, where no trust exist but only probability, entropy, chance, luck... but nothing serious, time-rewarding, or humane enough to appreciate and love it in the long run.

An actual Developer is someone who prioritizes thinking and solution finding relying on something deterministic and accountable.

All systems based on LLM, ML, or anything that is algorithmically based on feedback system, learning, training, is indeterministic, and hence, always inaccurate, unreliable, and irresponsible systems, by design.

The process of art-working, coding, programming, development, solution finding... that feel of an achievement. This is what I understand, too. There's no achievement in anything AI-driven - it based on luck/moment/probability/chance.

"Oh My God! Please, all Gods, make this AI output the finally correct code! Please!"

Fudge it.

And you also pay for it. You pay and depend on it, on the the luck, for the chance, for the probability someone controls for you over an API or algorithm you don't even know or cannot verify due its "self-training" design, or it being close-sourced.

> ...you're gatekeeping programming... you are not seeing the big picture... you are missing opportunities...

No, sorry, never. I do not agree with that. These "responses" are coming from infants, immature, children, I believe, sorry... from those who could not care less about the development, responsibility, the overall process of the life of us, people, to find solutions, to reach the goals, to treasure achievements, to write our history with actual names of people on papers sign on papers by hand... for what will leave after us, with art, statues, quotes... in the infinite history of the ineffably magnificent world...

Your name should be in the code you write alone or with a team, your commits, solutions. Your work must be acknowledged and kept in the history. You should be always a respectable alive artist, who is responsible for their work. Our history must evolve, be preserved, respected, appreciated, and shine with glory of our achievements with human names in it for the incredibly marvelous future of opportunities, discoveries, love, and purely magnificent marvel.

There's whole space out there, still, and we must add and keep human names in the history cherished.

> Machines should work. People should think. ~ IBM

Now that's a rare GitHub Username!

Though, again, a yet another project for a yet another "AI" to make someone else more dependent on it...

Related:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jev_(AI_model)  
    https://typesafe.ai/

And it shows:

    > Forgejo's code base (especially frontend) is quite out-dated, so nothing to do with Gitea.
    > 
    > Source: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/6058#issuecomment-5351342357 [2026-08-20 04-25-05Z]

Yes, a fear of license change, forking, and maintaining by enthusiasts is sure understandable, and is a miracle, but it does not let you to just dim/negate/forget the so marvelous history and human effort that allowed the fork, with still so little but appreciated changes, to even exist.

The author mentioned Forgejo, but why don't mention Gitea that is the direct fork of Forgejo without which the former would not even exist?

Why skip such a marvelous project that is still modern and inherits a marvelous amount of human time and work within?

Perhaps like you, I did contribute pull-requests/issues to the Gitea project, and know people who did, too. Why do you mention a fork that changed the license and added possibly just a few if compared to the initial base repository of the Gitea and its Action Runner based on nektos/act they mentioned in their own fork even, too?

Is this how they dim so recent history, but why?

Thank you. I do not believe the author has any idea what he is talking about, too. It's worth to also mention some basics:

    1. Dependency on some outsourced LLM vendors (no Internet? No API response? Welp, you do you.);
    2. Undefined amount of payments/paid subscriptions at vendors;
    3. Undefined amount of tokens burnt on each prompt/iteration within undisclosed algorithms;
    4. Absolutely no responsibility/copyright for the LLM output;
    5. Privacy concerns on inside/company project source code uploaded;
    6. Incremental eventual atrophy of developer's own skills;
    7. Inhuman attitude for art, development, effort, purpose in general, since the models are built on stolen effort of other, now unknown, people...

Does the contributor of Canonical mentioned consider the fair difference between the absence of any telemetry on actual Linux desktop people just opt-out initially, and the forced/hidden telemetry on Windows?

How is that even possible to compare these numbers and state anything aloud like this, if we have literally no idea how many genuine Ubuntu setups are there with absolutely no Microsoft involved?

Sorry, but I believe the blog post author's statements regarding "statistics" are not fair, inaccurate, and simply invalid.

The "AI" part is a literal nonsense, bigotry, and just awful, too. The author should rather check the following stance, and reconsider his history and life decisions, I believe:

    > AI drive-by issues, pull requests and security reports are overwhelming maintainers. Rising security expectations (thanks Mythos) require maintainers to do even more work. Open source funding is hard to secure and insufficient.
    > 
    > Some of this is happening, but I’m sure as hell not seeing it in Homebrew...
    > 
    > As I’ve written before, the scarcest resource in open source is not money but the motivation of the maintainers.
    > 
    > # Fun Is Social
    > 
    > My first real experience of OSS was with a successful, established project whose culture I could observe. It was KDE, the community behind a desktop environment for Linux...
    >  
    > Firstly, this was weird because, if you read the discourse online, you were typically in the camp of “KDE SUCKS, GNOME ROCKS” or “GNOME SUCKS, KDE ROCKS”. And yet: you had both groups working together. Not just working together but eating, drinking, socialising and building new friendships...
    > 
    > Source: https://mikemcquaid.com/open-source-must-be-fun-or-it-will-die
  

---

P.S. When I published the identical comment in the blog post comment section, via their Disqus feature below, their moderator just deleted my message, too, at ~1830 UTC.