I agree, the CLI is good enough. Thanks for the note about the GUI package manager! I hadn’t heard about that.
I also second the positive interactions. Mine have been almost exclusively positive. I’ve come across a few no effort “RTFM, idiot” attitudes but it’s rarer on Nix forums and repos than I’ve seen elsewhere.
Thanks for the note on Ditaa. I didn’t know it existed but I love the idea of rendering bitmaps from ASCII, especially on the web. It’s like Mermaid but the original syntax is a diagram in and of itself!
Like the author writes:
There is a number of formats that are text-based (html, docbook, LaTeX, programming language comments), but when rendered by other software (browsers, interpreters, the javadoc tool etc), they can contain images as part of their content. If ditaa was intergrated with those tools (and I’m planning to do the javadoc bit myself soon), then you would have readable/editable diagrams within the text format itself, something that would make things much easier. ditaa syntax can currently be embedded to HTML.
pysic
Right, for a paper physics problem. Try telling someone to multiply their hand by -1.
The only thing I don’t like about this is the implication of a left hand rule for left hand threads, which makes my E&M physics brain sad
When you say you host it live on Codeberg, do you mean something akin to GitHub pages? I didn’t know that existed
Of course! I’ve loved mine. The community and integration with Gadgetbridge are both awesome. You’re in for a treat if you go this route.
On the watch front I opted for the Bangle.JS 2. The abstraction to everything being JavaScript can be annoying, but takes away some foot guns for tinkerers who don’t want to optimize lower level code.
wherever you get your PCBs and associated components ;)
Cool video and channel. Thanks for posting!
TLDW:
[It was a cool attempt that may have spurred mobile Linux devs in an important way. Removable battery + hardware switches for communication subsystems were genuinely innovative and in tune with community interests. Also it was bad. 8 year old CPU, software that was trying to do everything everywhere all at once, cameras that didn’t work then technically did. Pine64 still exists and the Pinephone Pro is a thing (that the presenter hadn’t tested).]
Presenter was generous when describing the end product. It seems to me like they want to like it but came to the same conclusion as most did – it’s definitely not a daily driver. That said, it doesn’t have to be to remain a cool product.
Do give them a watch though if you have a chance. This is from a <1k subscriber channel and was well put together.
Second this ^
I have one and it’s fine, but not directly supported by OpenWRT. Looks like Beryl and Slate are though
Well that’s odd!
Here you go:
Please don’t assume anything, it’s not healthy.
Explicitly stating assumptions is necessary for good communication. That’s why we do it in research. :)
it depends on the license of that binary
It doesn’t, actually. A binary alone, by definition, is not open source as the binary is the product of the source, much like a model is the product of training and refinement processes.
You can’t just automatically consider something open source
On this we agree :) which is why saying a model is open source or slapping a license on it doesn’t make it open source.
the main point is that you can put closed source license on a model trained from open source data
Quite aggressive there friend. No need for that.
You have a point that intensive and costly training process plays a factor in the usefulness of a truly open source gigantic model. I’ll assume here that you’re referring to the likes of Llama3.1’s heavy variant or a similarly large LLM. Note that I wasn’t referring to gigantic LLMs specifically when referring to “models”. It is a very broad category.
However, that doesn’t change the definition of open source.
If I have an SDK to interact with a binary and “use it as [I] please” does that mean the binary is then open source because I can interact with it and integrate it into other systems and publish those if I wish? :)
Do you plan to sue the provider of your “open source” model? If so, would the goal be to force the provider to be in full compliance with the license (access to their source code and training set)? Would the goal be to force them to change the license to something they comply with?
You would be obligated, if your goal were to be complying with the spirit and description of open source (and sleeping well at night, in my opinion).
Do you have the source code and full data set used to train the “open source” model you’re referring to?
My point precisely :)
A pre-trained model alone can’t really be open source. Without the source code and full data set used to generate it, a model alone is analogous to a binary.
If I license a binary as open source does that make it open source?
This is not even slightly correct