Yes, they had reliability problems because so many fucking people are suddenly switching to them because they're so much better overall and not evil. Those are the kind of reliability problems that it is genuinely nice to see someone having. Having a little bit of a bumpy road when scaling due to significant rapid adoption is normal. So what?
Imagine not wanting to use Linux because it recently had a bunch of security flaws. And it did. But again, so what? Does that mean Linux has always been insecure? Well for those things it was. But is it still insecure? Maybe, who knows, nothing is perfect. Are you going to refuse to use it because you're not sure? Why? Past performance is not an indicator of future success.
If some minor reliability issues are your foremost concern to the point that the other things codeberg provides for free are not valuable to you because of it, I question the depth of your priorities.
That said, it is much healthier and better for people to self-host or use smaller less centralized providers if possible. I do not wish Codeberg to become a victim of their own success, and a healthy ecosystem is a diverse one. But it is not for everyone, and if all you need is a minimal fuss alternative to Github, Codeberg is right there.
That does seem to be their strategy, at least on its face. Although I'm not even sure I even really believe that is profitable, or if they're cooking the books with such incestuous partnership agreements that it's to the point where Nvidia might be effectively "buying" chips from themselves with their own money on their partner's behalf. I guess time will tell if they're actually the next Enron or not, but I don't trust any business that's AI related at this point.
It's wild that Amazon alone has already pissed away more on their own than even Nvidia has earned back. I'm also surprised that Anthropic still isn't remotely profitable given the sheer volume of money the rest of the corporate software world dumped into Claude Code and how much pressure Anthropic applied to monetize it. That alone should be enough to show that it is impossible for AI to be profitable in any traditional sense.
Their actual plan is to monopolize information and basically use (preferably their own) AI as the middleman and broker for all data and information and knowledge and advertising that any human being ever sees. In that, they might eventually be successful. At least if they don't run out of money trying (almost certain), and we don't kill them off or blow them up first.
I hope so too, but I'm also really sad to be living in a world where we're desiring and celebrating war machines again. I miss the days when Canada had peacekeepers, and we were able to solve most of our problems with words, and money, and trade, not violence and death and horror. I hope one day we can find our way back there again, but it doesn't seem like it will be anytime soon.
So what's the plan? Good luck on that vote you've got coming up, but let's not be naive about what might happen. Hiding and hoping didn't work out very well for Anne Frank, it won't work for Americans either.
I agree. It should be an opt-in permission, per-site, with the possibility to silently auto-reject always by default. Same with all the other advanced APIs like Wifi-Geolocation and WebGL etc, as they already mostly in my browser (Librewolf). These APIs are a trojan horse for fingerprinting, and it shows. If they weren't, they wouldn't mind disabling them by default.
They can try, but how can such "wealth" exist without mutual consent? Their entire concept of ownership is predicated on money. We have all bent the knee and pledged allegiance to the concept of "money" but what happens when people no longer choose to remain loyal to it? How do they plan to keep those channels restricted? How much do you have to pay your proxies to protect things on your behalf when money is no longer something that is driving value in people's lives anymore? How long can you keep money working as a motivating factor when the systems built on it start breaking down?
They have built their lives and plans on the same lies that we have. Those lies are only real because we have all willingly suspended our disbelief and chosen to believe them because it suits us to do so. If it no longer suits us, we no longer need to continue believing, and no matter how hard the small number of billionaires and larger numbers of millionaires insist on believing, it won't matter. Once enough people stop believing in the lies, it'll become crystal clear that the wealth was just an illusion all along.
I expect violence, from both sides, the only question is how long it will last and how severe it will be and what things will look like when it ends. I truly hope for something better, and I believe that with wisdom something much better is possible, but I'm not naive enough to expect it.
Because most Americans don't know anything about Bernie, or maybe at most they know of a few extreme quotes Fox News or CNN have spit out from him. Educated well-informed voters are a tiny, tiny subset of actual voters.
I recommend we allow billionaires to launch themselves into space, on their own dime. Occupy Mars! For the billionaires! So much free real estate waiting to be claimed!
Then the real trick is: once they've self-exiled, don't let them come back. And they will try to come back, trust me. They truly have no idea how much Mars sucks, they are NOT the brilliant clever people they have convinced both themselves and everyone else they are. Let them play their games, then laugh when they discover the consequences.
Corrupt, arbitrary policing isn't the flex you think it is.
If you want a law against this stuff, make a law against it, there probably already is one if the laws we have are properly interpreted and enforced. If you want proper enforcement of those laws and accountability for the police to actually follow those laws, then yes, we're on the same page.
Vigilante justice only happens when your justice system has failed. Tolerance of vigilante justice only happens when your justice system has already failed twice. That's Russia.
The common joke is that English is actually a dozen different languages hiding within a single trenchcoat. Just because some words and groups of words look similar and are spelled almost the same doesn't mean they follow the same linguistic rules because they might've come from a completely different language using a completely different linguistic system or a completely different time period. It's really almost impossible to tell how to work with a particular English word without knowing its backstory, even when there are "rules", most of the rules have plenty of exceptions because of this.
Trying to draw clear, consistent, universal patterns out of the English language is a fool's errand. If you wanted to achieve that, you'd need another language. (and then English would probably steal a bunch of its words too)
Yeah people don't understand the math behind these things. They are statistical models, like demographics or climate models. They are interesting and potentially useful, but not necessarily useful for the things we are trying to and want to use them for. They can predict certain things and trends very reliably in a general, high-level sense, but they will get the details wrong if you try to use them outside of their area of applicability, just like if you try to use national climate models to determine what day your basement is going to flood, it may come up with a specific date, but just as obviously that's not actually going to be correct in reality. It doesn't mean it's a bad model, it means you're using it wrong.
And lots of AI bros and AI companies are using these things desperately wrong, and for very wrong reasons. They want to sell things to you. They want to control you and manipulate you. They don't care if they're using the model properly, they only care if it's profitable for them to do it.
Dude has a fever and the only prescription is more AI.
Yes, they had reliability problems because so many fucking people are suddenly switching to them because they're so much better overall and not evil. Those are the kind of reliability problems that it is genuinely nice to see someone having. Having a little bit of a bumpy road when scaling due to significant rapid adoption is normal. So what?
Imagine not wanting to use Linux because it recently had a bunch of security flaws. And it did. But again, so what? Does that mean Linux has always been insecure? Well for those things it was. But is it still insecure? Maybe, who knows, nothing is perfect. Are you going to refuse to use it because you're not sure? Why? Past performance is not an indicator of future success.
If some minor reliability issues are your foremost concern to the point that the other things codeberg provides for free are not valuable to you because of it, I question the depth of your priorities.
That said, it is much healthier and better for people to self-host or use smaller less centralized providers if possible. I do not wish Codeberg to become a victim of their own success, and a healthy ecosystem is a diverse one. But it is not for everyone, and if all you need is a minimal fuss alternative to Github, Codeberg is right there.
Except when it's TechnologyConnections. He is my spirit-geek.
The Rock is at least funny sometimes. AI is incapable of anything resembling humor. I'd nominate Tom Cruise instead.
Indeed, why trust a plausible answer that could be AI generated? Direct experimentation is the only proof I'm willing to accept!
That does seem to be their strategy, at least on its face. Although I'm not even sure I even really believe that is profitable, or if they're cooking the books with such incestuous partnership agreements that it's to the point where Nvidia might be effectively "buying" chips from themselves with their own money on their partner's behalf. I guess time will tell if they're actually the next Enron or not, but I don't trust any business that's AI related at this point.
I know. It makes me sad.
It's wild that Amazon alone has already pissed away more on their own than even Nvidia has earned back. I'm also surprised that Anthropic still isn't remotely profitable given the sheer volume of money the rest of the corporate software world dumped into Claude Code and how much pressure Anthropic applied to monetize it. That alone should be enough to show that it is impossible for AI to be profitable in any traditional sense.
Their actual plan is to monopolize information and basically use (preferably their own) AI as the middleman and broker for all data and information and knowledge and advertising that any human being ever sees. In that, they might eventually be successful. At least if they don't run out of money trying (almost certain), and we don't kill them off or blow them up first.
I hope so too, but I'm also really sad to be living in a world where we're desiring and celebrating war machines again. I miss the days when Canada had peacekeepers, and we were able to solve most of our problems with words, and money, and trade, not violence and death and horror. I hope one day we can find our way back there again, but it doesn't seem like it will be anytime soon.
So what's the plan? Good luck on that vote you've got coming up, but let's not be naive about what might happen. Hiding and hoping didn't work out very well for Anne Frank, it won't work for Americans either.
I agree. It should be an opt-in permission, per-site, with the possibility to silently auto-reject always by default. Same with all the other advanced APIs like Wifi-Geolocation and WebGL etc, as they already mostly in my browser (Librewolf). These APIs are a trojan horse for fingerprinting, and it shows. If they weren't, they wouldn't mind disabling them by default.
They can try, but how can such "wealth" exist without mutual consent? Their entire concept of ownership is predicated on money. We have all bent the knee and pledged allegiance to the concept of "money" but what happens when people no longer choose to remain loyal to it? How do they plan to keep those channels restricted? How much do you have to pay your proxies to protect things on your behalf when money is no longer something that is driving value in people's lives anymore? How long can you keep money working as a motivating factor when the systems built on it start breaking down?
They have built their lives and plans on the same lies that we have. Those lies are only real because we have all willingly suspended our disbelief and chosen to believe them because it suits us to do so. If it no longer suits us, we no longer need to continue believing, and no matter how hard the small number of billionaires and larger numbers of millionaires insist on believing, it won't matter. Once enough people stop believing in the lies, it'll become crystal clear that the wealth was just an illusion all along.
I expect violence, from both sides, the only question is how long it will last and how severe it will be and what things will look like when it ends. I truly hope for something better, and I believe that with wisdom something much better is possible, but I'm not naive enough to expect it.
Because most Americans don't know anything about Bernie, or maybe at most they know of a few extreme quotes Fox News or CNN have spit out from him. Educated well-informed voters are a tiny, tiny subset of actual voters.
I recommend we allow billionaires to launch themselves into space, on their own dime. Occupy Mars! For the billionaires! So much free real estate waiting to be claimed!
Then the real trick is: once they've self-exiled, don't let them come back. And they will try to come back, trust me. They truly have no idea how much Mars sucks, they are NOT the brilliant clever people they have convinced both themselves and everyone else they are. Let them play their games, then laugh when they discover the consequences.
Corrupt, arbitrary policing isn't the flex you think it is.
If you want a law against this stuff, make a law against it, there probably already is one if the laws we have are properly interpreted and enforced. If you want proper enforcement of those laws and accountability for the police to actually follow those laws, then yes, we're on the same page.
Vigilante justice only happens when your justice system has failed. Tolerance of vigilante justice only happens when your justice system has already failed twice. That's Russia.
The best household robots are the ones that don't move at all. Appliances. Like a dishwasher, FFS.
The common joke is that English is actually a dozen different languages hiding within a single trenchcoat. Just because some words and groups of words look similar and are spelled almost the same doesn't mean they follow the same linguistic rules because they might've come from a completely different language using a completely different linguistic system or a completely different time period. It's really almost impossible to tell how to work with a particular English word without knowing its backstory, even when there are "rules", most of the rules have plenty of exceptions because of this.
Trying to draw clear, consistent, universal patterns out of the English language is a fool's errand. If you wanted to achieve that, you'd need another language. (and then English would probably steal a bunch of its words too)
Polite is what horrifying brutality wears to an interview.
When I grow up I want to be a data center.
Yeah people don't understand the math behind these things. They are statistical models, like demographics or climate models. They are interesting and potentially useful, but not necessarily useful for the things we are trying to and want to use them for. They can predict certain things and trends very reliably in a general, high-level sense, but they will get the details wrong if you try to use them outside of their area of applicability, just like if you try to use national climate models to determine what day your basement is going to flood, it may come up with a specific date, but just as obviously that's not actually going to be correct in reality. It doesn't mean it's a bad model, it means you're using it wrong.
And lots of AI bros and AI companies are using these things desperately wrong, and for very wrong reasons. They want to sell things to you. They want to control you and manipulate you. They don't care if they're using the model properly, they only care if it's profitable for them to do it.