Just the same? If you publish a model that doesn't follow these rules nobody in the EU could use that model in their business. You could publish unlicensed source code as well and nobody could really use it for anything business related either.
> If you publish a model that doesn't follow these rules
The rules require tracking outputs, which open-weight models cannot do. So I'm wondering if open-weight models have separate rules or this effectively bans releasing such models.
Of course they can. Lets assume you are using such a model in your product, this now makes tracking its output your responsibility. It is really no different from the way you would use an open source library.
That is confusing since closed-weight models (the models, not the applications using the models) also can't track outputs. It would be weird if the rules applied to the model and not the application because then it literally only applies to open-weight models since the closed-weight models are, by definition, never released to the public.
Trying to understand the rules but it doesn't seem to make a clear distinction between these things. I assume that they are intending the applications that use the models, not the models.
Its also mathematically proven that infinite monkeys typing on typewriters for eternity will recreate all works of Shakespeare. It still takes someone with an actual brain to recognize the correct output.
Not seeing this coming, I guess. IT experts where warning of this for years but where essentially ridiculed instead. I still blame the US for backstabbing their allies though.
The main dev, apart from being a reactionary nutjob, created enough bugs and compatibility breaks that Xorg proper is now reverting a lot of their changes.[0] I guess we will see if this project survives for longer than a few months.
> The main dev, apart from being a reactionary nutjob
This is honestly an understatement. Posting antivax conspiracy theories on LKML? Reactionary. Writing anti-DEI rants in his REAMDE and COC files? Reactionary. But this long-winded rant [1] defending WW2 Germany? "Reactionary" doesn't even begin to describe it.
Whatever one's opinion on Wayland, his conduct [2] should be a huge red flag to anyone using his software.
Uh, he has a detailed historical view of the forces that caused WW2 and argued that the rest of world powers at the time put germany in a position that was very likely to cause the second world war. woOoOo scary, the only allowed thought pattern is "ww2 germany bad" after all. If you want to debate him on details go ahead, but trying to use this as some kind of cancel-culture fodder is a waste of everyone's brain cells.
Character assassination campaigns like this are so pathetic on so many levels. What you are doing is already worse behavior than what you're trying to accuse him of.
And that you quoted him complaining about the russian developer bans is confusing. Why do you think "not wanting people banned by their country of origin" is a bad thing? What, are you racist?
The only people on character assassination campaigns here are literal Nazi followers rewriting the past trying to depict one of the worst genocide in modern history as an act of "peace." It's legitimate and inevitable that people judge you by your actions, all the more when it comes to what you choose to stand up for. Trying to call that "cancel culture" is just lazy and changes nothing. When someone stands up for Nazis or their defenders and that damages their reputation, that's on them.
Also, trolling LKML doesn't solve racism. Nor does having the Linux project violate sanctions.
I'm not going to touch the Holocaust or AfD shtick, but when it comes to "causes of the second world war", the things the allies did to Germany after the first world war are pretty high up there.
Should the Germans have started invading countries and slaughtering millions of innocent people? Obviously not. But the way the German people were treated was going to lead to war, eventually, and it almost seems like the treaty of Versailles was engineered that way. Unfortunately, the guy that managed to unite enough German people to start the war was a nazi instead of a Napoleon.
When it came to the war itself, the allies and the Germans were no worse than each other. Obviously the mass murder the Germans were doing makes their side the "bad" side of the war, but if it hadn't been for the Holocaust I doubt the lines would be all that clear. At the end of the war, cities were bombed and razed to the ground out of revenge and bloodlust, not out of military strategy. It's amazing what you can get away with if you're on the "right" side at the end of a war.
I think this guy's speech is full of right wing rethoric that's often a dog whistle for the far right, but he's not "defending WW2 Germany" as a reactionary. If I were German, I'd be happy that Hitler's legacy is in crumbles and that many of the horrible people doing his bidding got what they deserved, but I'd be pretty pissed off that Churchill and his people never had to face any tribunals.
Social media, AI etc has created a post reality world.
We DON'T all live in the same reality, the echo chambers and false narratives being fed to us and corralling us is completely messing with our heads.
back in the 60's and 70's we were worried that the CIA was micro dosing the population... what we've learned is that isn't even needed. just feed us attractive lies and we'll line up for brainworms via the internet and TV day and night.
Well, MKultra did happen. The fact that it didn't work don't mean they never tried :D
Concerning the WW2 lies about the start of the war, my principal issue with them are that they are quite easy to disprove, you just need to read _english_ cables sent to Poland which are publicly available, where they asked Poland to accept Germany ultimatum on Danzig and polish borders. I fact, Chamberlain Guarantee of polish independence explicitly didn't guarantee its borders. It was clearly an attempt to prevent another Czekoslovakia. Thus people believing them have to be idiots, I don't see another solution.
Also if you want to check Poland response, it's translated already. They said in late May 39 they tried to get a hold on German chief diplomat (not Ribbentrof, the second one) to accept most of Germany's terms, but couldn't. They surrendered by press, pushed articles in the free city to explain they removed border checks with Germany by July 39.
You can evolve political views but it usually rarely happens, more like in six decades than in six years. You can't evolve or lose basic human empathy though. You either have it or not.
Did he ever renounce his own views? Because publicly spouting Nazi propaganda isn't the kind of thing he can pretend never happened by just waiting a few years. I'm all for leniency, but he needs to show that he's changed. Especially when he has said things like:
- WW2 Germany was "peaceful" and that the war was "forced" upon them
- Churchill and Roosevelt "should have been the first to be prosecuted in the Nuremberg trials"
- The German AfD party is "(mis)labeled" by the mainstream media as Nazis
I'll go a step further and point out that someone who is not only willing to parrot these views but has a fairly detailed rationale for why they believe them are so devoted to those views that I'd find a disavowal of them somewhat suspicious.
Fortunately, it's also pretty clear from other contextual clues that he sees no reason to disavow those beliefs.
On the topic that Nazis are bad and that the Holocaust happened? Yes.
For all his whinging and whining about "muh dresden bombings", he conveniently seems to "forget" that all that stopped one of the worst genocides in history, including planned genocides (such as those of the Slavic people). And then when he does bring up the Holocaust later it's in a way that seems an awful lot like Holocaust denial.
I'm a simple guy. Goose-steps like a Nazi and salutes like a Nazi? Probably a Nazi.
> Xorg proper is now reverting a lot of their changes
They're returning to a previous state which they believe possessed positive characteristics absent from contemporary? Somebody should come up with a word for that.
Yeah when I first heard of XLibre i went and saw some of the comments on the maintainer's freedesktop PRs and immediately lost interest in the project.
That was before i even knew they were a Nazi-defending nutcase insistent on dragging politics into LKML.
Frankly hope the project dies. Wayland can't replace X for me yet but I've no confidence XLibre is an improvement on X11 in any capacity.
The main repository's README has essentially a somewhat skeevy general undertone of "we accept all contributions from all kinds of people, but anyone who disagrees with me is clearly an evil paid corporate shill out to get me." At the time I read it, I didn't know or care who it was.
Then someone mentioned that this was the guy who got Torvalds to tell him GTFO off the kernel mailing lists, and when reading the article about it, I saw the name of the individual. Just seeing that name immediately reminded me of some interactions I've personally had with him a decade ago which eventually resulted (IIRC) in him being told to GTFO of that project. And the catalyst for this fork is being told to GTFO of Xorg thanks to his interactions with the rest of the people.
This is someone who is constantly grating on peoples' nerves to the point that they're kicked out of open source projects for being net negative contributors to the project. And given the repeat nature of it, they also lack the perspicacity to realize the commonality of these incidents. Now a thorough description of their behavior is perhaps superior to just calling them a "reactionary nutjob," but their reputation does proceed them and is justly earned.
You'd expect that the changes would've been reverted sooner if that was all there was to it, no? How come they're suddenly a problem?
that was my first thought too. if these commits were a problem they should not have been accepted in the first place.
was there no review process in place? and if there was no review, isn't that a sign that the project is dead? and if the project is dead what's with the sudden activity?
AFAICT they were reviewed, but too leniently in light of his "improve the codebase" rhetoric. His recent drama and stirring has brought eyes from more senior members of the team, which realized his work was shotty and several changes being made were outright wrong or caused new bugs.
His recent drama and stirring has brought eyes from more senior members of the team
that's what's bothering me. because someone misbehaves suddenly everything this person does receives more scrutiny. it should have received that scrutiny from the beginning. as should every other PR. the behavior or the character of a person should not affect how critical i review their code. that's discrimination. if this was a woman this reaction would be considered sexist.
if the reason was that people actually reported issues and those issues would point to one persons submissions so that a track record of bad submissions builds up then it would be reasonable to wonder what else did this person do wrong. but drama and stirring is not a good reason to suddenly question someones ability as a coder.
Realistically, any significant project can't do what you want. Linus cannot review every bit of code that enters the kernel, he delegates that task to trusted people. And they may themselves delegate further.
If something breaks or some external force appears, Linus may review the work of the delegates more closely than normal. And that's often when we get his most memorable rants, when he tells people he's putting trust in to stop disappointing him because they know better.
> The behavior or the character of a person should not affect how critical i review their code. that's discrimination. if this was a woman this reaction would be considered sexist.
What are you even talking about? That's not what happened.
Different reviewers, with higher standards for their project, who understand the code better are now looking. Their conclusion was "this code is awful and caused breaks".
They aren't reviewing it any different than other code.
Also, weird to bring up sexism. It is absolutely not the same to say I would refuse code from a Nazi apologist as to say I would refuse code from a woman.
> The behavior or the character of a person should not affect how critical i review their code.
What are you even talking about? That's not what happened.
you said:
His recent drama and stirring has brought eyes from more senior members of the team
and that's my interpretation of that. did you mean something else? if i misunderstood you then i apologize.
It is absolutely not the same to say I would refuse code from a Nazi apologist as to say I would refuse code from a woman.
i disagree. especially if it is code that has already been accepted. besides, that's not what's happening here. the code is not summarily rejected. it is more critically scrutinized. and doing that is absolutely the same thing as more critically scrutinizing someones code because of their gender. so the nazi excuse doesn't work.
Go read the discussions on the PRs. The maintainers responsible for the merges admit their mistake in approving them. This is all out in the open if you actually care.
If a new startup comes up, and someone points out "they've taken funding from Philip Morris / Altria", that is completely on topic, and will affect how some people evaluate the company. This is comparable.
Calling someone a "reactionary nutjob" isn't really informative. You can put someome's biases on display without insults, just as other commenters have done.
Can you explain how xorg developers removing a lot of their own code and calling it "bad" because they get mad at someone makes you think that xorg is professional and makes the fork look bad? I am only able to see it the opposite way, that is, xorg developers have no idea wtf are they doing.
I mean them deleting their own code only proves their own incompetence not Enrico's.
Definitely some blame also belongs to the Xorg committer who reviewed and merged those changes (and it looks like that person understands that in retrospect). But the primary responsibility for getting a change right is the author's.
The main devs, apart from being reactionary nutjobs, created enough bugs and compatibility breaks in Xorg proper by reverting a lot of X11Libre changes.[0] I guess we will see if this project survives for longer than a few months.
Yes, its all a big conspiracy against X11, lets all slander these selfish open source developers that don't sacrifice enough of their time and dare to make technical choices you don't agree with. How about you step up and maintain the X11 backend for "QTK" yourself.
This only supports my point about having more stuff to maintain. Now there's this GitHub page having a large "Download on Flathub" link that goes absolutely nowhere because the package is unmaintained. Who makes the GitHub page go away?
Also, the image on that page is outdated, which would have been one more thing to maintain. In addition, the install instructions are four lines of code to run, compared with three lines of code to download without Flathub. My point stands: Flathub adds an unnecessary maintenance burden (to some projects).
Yes and if they are caught they will be prosecuted and punished like with any other ban. Converting a significant amount of Monero into actual money will become much harder if its illegal. This will reduce availability of such services and make privacy coins less attractive to criminals which is exactly what the ban is aiming for.
