Notices by Josh Triplett (josh@social.joshtriplett.org)
-
Embed this notice
Josh Triplett (josh@social.joshtriplett.org)'s status on Saturday, 22-Mar-2025 04:23:04 JST 
Josh Triplett
This is on the board, for making up new requirements on the fly during an election process. Tally the results, announce the winners publicly, *then* by all means enforce requirements the now-elected board members must reach until they duly change those requirements. This holds doubly true when there is *every reason* to believe that the rule changes specifically targeted candidates the existing board didn't like; it doesn't *matter* if that was the real reason or not, it's the default and reasonable assumption anyone should make when the process of an election is changed on the fly in ways that *just so happen* to affect specific candidates. The process itself is now rightfully suspect, when it had no need to be. -
Embed this notice
Josh Triplett (josh@social.joshtriplett.org)'s status on Tuesday, 05-Nov-2024 04:18:32 JST
Josh Triplett
The board is incorrect. The OSI has corrupted the term Open Source by allowing those who want to propagate AIs that launder Open Source and proprietary code/data alike to do so under the banner of "Open Source". In particular, the so-called "Open Source AI" definition permits calling an AI "Open Source" even if it was trained on Open Source code or data and the license of its weights and outputs completely ignores the license of its training data.
This is an attempt to normalize the unacceptable practice of letting AI launder away the licenses of its training data, and to continue the practices of establishing "facts on the ground" that augur towards being able to continue ignoring the licenses of training data. The flagrant behavior of current AI training should not be allowed to continue, and should not be treated as a valid negotiating position from which to "compromise". Do not normalize the violation of Open Source licenses. -
Embed this notice
Josh Triplett (josh@social.joshtriplett.org)'s status on Saturday, 02-Nov-2024 00:47:52 JST
Josh Triplett
One year, I had a trick-or-treater dressed as a YouTube comments section. -
Embed this notice
Josh Triplett (josh@social.joshtriplett.org)'s status on Friday, 06-Sep-2024 03:46:50 JST
Josh Triplett
Measured boot can be a powerful technology for users, but it's also an extremely dual-use technology with both good ("trust your software stack and results") and bad ("website trusts that your browser will display ads and not allow copying/saving"; "app trusts that you don't have root on your phone") uses. Doubly so with the possibility of remote attestation. -
Embed this notice
Josh Triplett (josh@social.joshtriplett.org)'s status on Saturday, 13-Apr-2024 23:53:55 JST
Josh Triplett
(Using Mes to bootstrap the world is still a good idea, though. But the tools used for bootstrap don't need to be the same as the tools used for day-to-day builds.) -
Embed this notice
Josh Triplett (josh@social.joshtriplett.org)'s status on Saturday, 13-Apr-2024 23:53:55 JST
Josh Triplett
I don't think it's sustainable to force an older version of anything, except for bootstrapping (e.g. use old Python to build new Python).
Scheme would be less work for bootstrapping but more work for users (since most users won't be using Scheme for anything else). I'd rather have less work for users, which means more potential reviewers.
It's challenging to make Python code opaque, and doing so is automatically suspicious.
(As an aside, when I'm saying "Python" I'm not automatically assuming "to run Meson". Meson has some nice properties, but is not the end-all be-all of build systems, and seems far too opinionated to be a universal build system for everyone.) -
Embed this notice
Josh Triplett (josh@social.joshtriplett.org)'s status on Thursday, 02-Nov-2023 14:20:46 JST
Josh Triplett
That seems like something that could have been standardized through data rather than code, though. For instance, a standard interface for power supply hardware, with enumerable power lines, and tables that say "this device is attached to this power line".
Having *tables* in firmware seems like a great thing, for everyone except vendors who think it'll destroy their ability to "differentiate" and "value add". Why give vendors a language to drive arbitrary non-standard functionality?
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the