cenzorrll

So if requires full access to your PC from the internet to have full access to your PC?

If you'd actually read the comment you'd see they already answered this question

From what I've read, they're using AI to find bugs. As far as I'm concerned, a bug is a bug no matter who or what finds it. So long as they aren't using it to produce code.

Seriously, it's like a middle school writing assignment to reach 5 pages, but worse.

I can tell the difference between nvme and sata when booting and loading applications. It's so small that I'm happy to remain a cheap ass. I also went to college in the "turn on your computer, then go make breakfast" days, so I guess in more tolerant of it.

I just had a thought. The people pushing for AI use get fined when the make huge mistakes, basically a speeding ticket. But they're pushing AI on people that get fired or go to jail if they make a huge mistake, more like A DUI. So they're saying "use this thing that makes the kind of mistakes that I'd fire you over, and take responsibility of it".

Fines and payments coming through courtrooms are often oddly specific with absolutely wild variations in how that was calculated. I'm sure the actual number is calculated to an odd cent value as well.

The facts: ISBNdb has never purchased, scanned, or sold a book — for AI training or anything else,” ISBNdb wrote. “We don't train AI models, and we never have."

I found the weasel. "We don't know why AI companies are buying tons of books from us and have a continuous bonfire out back, we just sell books for people to read"

BSD is a permissive license that allows sometime to take the code and update/change it as they see fit. There are no requirements to publish those changes, and I believe you can license it under a different license.

GPL on the other hand does require that you publish your changes, and that those changes also be licensed under GPL. Thus also requires that a company does due diligence and states what pieces of code they used were GPL and give credit

So in removing the last bit of GPL code, someone can take FreeBSD and do whatever they want without having to worry about what pieces of code might fall under different licenses.

Seriously, it's the only reason I bought one. Plus, my WRT-54gl is still supported 20 years later on DD-WRT, not that it's all that useful at 100mbit. I still use it for testing.

Now you've got me questioning myself, never claimed to be an expert...

Edit: yep I'm wrong, a microkernel was developed, but looks like it eventually made it's way to GNU Hurd and not really implemented into the BSDs. I recall coming across when looking into different OSs, I guess I got it mixed up.

There are high odds you are using a chrome based browser to read this - did you know that is a GPL project because once upon a time it was khtml (from the KDE project), but the changes were never contributed back.

Chromium is what you're ignoring here, and they are contributed back.

Many embedded companies have their own fork of linux as well - their changes are all available as the GPL requires, but the changes won't be accepted to the kernel as is and so the fact that they are available is useless.

And that's fine, if someone ever did want to pick it up, they could.

Meanwhile there are many companies using FreeBSD who choose to contribute their changes back.

I didn't say there weren't people/companies contributing to BSD. I am saying that since they aren't required to, BSD isn't getting the level of support it deserves. The companies contributing to GPL projects are required by law to release the source, so they might as well contribute to the project. I can guarantee there would be a lot less progress in linux/gnuland if releasing the source wasn't required.