Yes that's exactly how it works, it's called curtailment.

It's a black box that thinks for me, sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad, sometimes it times out.

I am extremely skeptical of AI products anyone builds. It's just using one black box to build scaffolding around another black box and then typically want to charge money for it. I don't see any value there.

A horse without gear is a wild animal. Slap on a saddle, some reigns, and training and it’s suddenly a transport vehicle.

AI products can and do help make the raw models applicable to targeted domains. Think of them as a black box sure, but that doesn’t mean they dont add value.

depends on if they're selling you an AI wrapper or if they built something useful.

Also, depends on who target user is.

AI can be used to build deterministic software

I highly recommend playing Frictonal Games' Soma from 2015. It is an extremely critical examination of this entire concept. Without spoiling the plot, a digitized consciousness doesn't imply just one, but an infinite number of copies, some just subjected to torture as they are essentially disposable.

All of the concepts SOMA explored were already familiar to me, but the experience of exploring the through the game was so much stronger than reading about them in a text book. Such a strong, lasting effect, I wish I could play it again for the first time.

But I don't think we've seen cannabis, especially when not smoked, have anywhere near the health risk of alcohol.

Sure but my point was that you cannot have an argument where you go "yeah this happens so it's good" while you disregard everything else (it's a different question on how bad it is compared to alcohol etc). But if we follow the logic of the original comment, then it's valid logic since "hey it works so its scientifically proven!" You can replace alcohol with something else to highlight that as well, like how putting out a kitchen fire with a bucket of gasoline is a good idea. It completely covers the flames for a split second! Why worry about the explosion that happens immediately after?

So my comment wasn't about alcohol vrs cannabis but rather how that kind of logic is short-sighted and faulty.

There is no "Wayland" to address these issues. It's like asking "web" to address its issues.

Wayland is a protocol with multiple different implementations.

But this is sort of the nature of the problem?

In X11, the problem was Xserver. Now, X11's design philosophy was hopelessly broken and needed to be replaced, but it wasn't replaced. As you correctly point out, there is no "Wayland", Wayland is a methodology, a description, of how one might implement the technologies necessary to replace X11.

This has led to hopeless fracturing and replication of effort. Every WM is forced to become an entire compositor and partial desktop environment, which they inevitably fail at. In turn application developers cannot rely on protocol extensions which represent necessary desktop program behavior being available or working consistently.

This manifests in users feeling the ecosystem is forever broken, because for them, on their machine, some part of it is.

There is no longer one central broken component to be fixed. There are hundreds of scattered, slightly broken components.

I maintain Red Hat backed it as part of a play to make it harder to develop competing distros that aren’t basically identical to Red Hat’s product.

Their actions on systemd, Wayland, plus gnome and associated tech, sure look like classic “fire and motion”. Everyone else has to play catch-up, and they steer enough incompatible-with-alternatives default choices that it’s a ton of work and may involve serious compromises to resist just doing whatever they do.

I miss the Unix philosophy

Wayland is far more aligned with the Unix philosophy than Xorg ever was. Xorg was a giant, monolithic, do everything app.

The Unix philosophy is fragmentation into tiny pieces, each doing one thing and hoping everyone else conforms to the same interfaces. Piping commands between processes and hoping for the best. That's exactly how Wayland works, although not in plain text because that would be a step too far even for Wayland.

Some stuff should not follow the Unix philosophy, PID 1 and the compositor are chief examples of things that should not. It is better to have everything centralized for these processes.

In X you have server, window manager, compositing manager, and clients and all is scoupled by a very flexible protocol. This seems nicely split and aligned with Unix philosophy to me. It also works very well, so I do not think this should be monolithic.

This is quite wrong? There are some features that get blocked from being implemented because Wayland refused to define a protocol for everyone to implement. Window positioning being a recent example of how progress can get blocked for many years due to Wayland.

This is same cop out people use to talk about "Linux."

"No, Linux isn't bad, your distro/DE is bad, if you used XYZ then you wouldn't have this problem." And then you waste your time switching to XYZ and you just find new problems in XYZ that you didn't have in your original distro.

I'm genuinely tired of this in the Linux community. You can't use the "Wayland" label only for the good stuff like "Wayland is good for security!" and "Wayland is the future" and then every time someone complains about Wayland, it is "no, that's not true Wayland, because Wayland isn't real."

But that's what we signed up for in the Linux wirld. Linux systems are smorgasbord of different components by design, and that means being specific. I'm using KDE Plasma 6, that's a different experience than someone using Cosmic or Sway.

Furthermore, Wayland is, first and foremost, a protocol, not a standalone software like the Linux kernel. Wayland is no more than an API format transmitted over the Wire protocol. So properly criticizing Wayland is about criticizing the abstraction this API creates and the constraints introduced by it.

Could you briefly explain in simple terms, why I as a user would care about any of that? I want stuff to work. With Wayland, it largely doesn't. I don't terribly care about the semantics of it.

Like going to the dentist for a root canal when it's your neighbors that actually needs one and you can't afford it because a significant portion of your income is already paying down debt, the problem is getting worse, and you just decided to make less money this year

It's not so much tournaments but viewership. People watch others play on Twitch, that gets you money directly as well as sponsorships. This incentives people to cheat so they're good on stream.

It is a lot harder to cheat on a live stream though.

Deliveries have been falling for the past two years.

To make matters worse, falling while the deliveries of their competitors are rising.

How many Bluesky servers are there?

This isn’t Mastodon so a “Bluesky server” isn’t a thing.

Mastodon is shaped like email so you have “servers” sending messages to each other.

Atproto is shaped more like RSS with aggregation. Everyone posts data to their hosting (which anyone could move at any time), and apps like Bluesky aggregate data from everyone’s hosting.

So a concept like “Bluesky server” is nonsensical. What you have is “atproto hosting” (which can be provided by Bluesky, by other communities, by other companies, or can be self-hosted — it’s all open source and you can even implement your own) and “Bluesky app” (of which there’s only one — but there are forks like Blacksky which fork the entire stack including the server). There also “other atproto apps” like https://leaflet.pub, https://tangled.org, etc, which have nothing to do with Bluesky.

I just hit printscreen and save, I think you may be confusing your familiarity with a system with user friendliness.

For comparison, MacOS doesn't have a printscreen key, it's command-shift-3 or command-shift-4. Much more confusing to newcomers in my experience.

Spectacle used to just let you automatically save with no confirmation dialog, then they changed that a year or so ago. Maybe it's still possible to configure it but I was less than happy to have my default changed.

It's a bit slow for me, in my experience. Sometimes doesn't want to copy the image to the clipboard. Saving is also wonky. Really wish I just had sharex on Linux