in this interview the guy behind the event (Mark Fitzpatrick) says this:

he’s also a flat earther:

This article buries the lede so much that many readers probably miss it completely: the important takeaway here, which is clearer in The Register’s version of the story, is that ChatGPT cannot actually play chess:

“Despite being given a baseline board layout to identify pieces, ChatGPT confused rooks for bishops, missed pawn forks, and repeatedly lost track of where pieces were."

To actually use an LLM as a chess engine without the kind of manual intervention that this person did, you would need to combine it with some other software to automate continuing to ask it for a different next move every time it suggests an invalid one. And, if you did that, it would still mostly lose, even to much older chess engines than Atari’s Video Chess.

edit: i see now that numerous people have done this; you can find many websites where you can “play chess against chatgpt” (which actually means: with chatgpt and also some other mechanism to enforce the rules). and if you know how to play chess you should easily win :)

incredible self-own from ArduPilot co-creator Jason Short:

Not in a million years would I have predicted this outcome. I just wanted to make flying robots.

🤡

(of course, in reality, many people were discussing weaponization even on the day diydrones was announced…)

a bit of context:

• I Still Know What You Visited Last Summer

• https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/CSS_selectors/Privacy_and_the_visited_selector

• https://www.theregister.com/2025/04/07/chrome_135_history_sniffing/

The network never went down.

You say that but, everything I ever posted on identica (and also on Evan’s later OStatus site Status.Net, which i was a paying customer of) went 404 just a few years later. 😢

When StatusNet shut down I was offered a MySQL dump, which is better than nothing for personal archival but not actually useful for setting up a new instance due to OStatus having DNS-based identity and lacking any concept for migrating to a new domain.

https://identi.ca/evan/note/6EZ4Jzp5RQaUsx5QzJtL4A notes that Evan’s own first post is “still visible on Identi.ca today, although the URL format changed a few years ago, and the redirect plugin stopped working a few years after that.” … but for whatever reason he decided that most accounts (those inactive over a year, iiuc, which I was because I had moved to using StatusNet instead of identica) weren’t worthy of migrating to his new pump.io architecture at all.

Here is some reporting about it from 2013: https://lwn.net/Articles/544347/

As an added bonus, to the extent that I can find some of my posts on archive.org, links in them were all automatically replaced (it was the style at the time) with redirects via Evan’s URL shortening service ur1.ca which is also now long-dead.

imo the deletion of most of the content in the proto-fediverse (PubSubHubbubiverse? 😂) was an enormous loss; I and many other people had years of great discussions on these sites which I wish we could revisit today.

🪦

The fact that ActivityPub now is still a thing where people must (be a sysadmin or) pick someone else’s domain to marry their online identity to is even more sad. ActivityPub desperately needs to become content addressable and decouple identity from other responsibilities. This experiment (which i learned of via this post) from six years ago seemed like a huge step in the right direction, but I don’t know if anyone is really working on solving these problems currently. 😢

Lmao that my pedanticism could be perceived as BSD advocacy - fwiw, I primarily use GNU/Linux, I develop GPL-licensed software, and I think GPLv3 or AGPLv3 are good choices for many new projects starting today.

My opinions about the history and future of copyleft are somewhat complicated but I didn’t mention any opinions in the comment you’re replying to - I was just correcting your factual misunderstandings about the accepted definitions of these terms.

Is this a spam campaign?

Five of the eleven comments so far (including one from OP) are all recommending the same service; all five are from accounts less than 2 months old with a one or two digit number of comments 🤔

By “solar power in operation” (in GW) i think they mean maximum output capacity rather than actual production, since these numbers add up to 923 GW while wikipedia says in 2024 there was 2.13 petawatt-hours (243 GW on average) actually produced by solar.

These articles were stolen, by the paywall operators. Elbakyan rescued them from the thieves. 🎉

As I wrote in the thread about this last month on !linux@lemmy.ml:

I wonder how much work is entailed in transforming Fedora in to a distro that meets some definition of the word “Sovereign” 🤔

Personally I wouldn’t want to make a project like this be dependent on the whims of a US defense contractor like RedHat/IBM, especially after what happened with CentOS.

and, re: “what do you mean ‘redhat is a defense contractor’?!”: here are some links.

(source)

as a mod/admin, i would appreciate being able to edit post titles. there have been a fair number of times where i asked a poster to do so, and then waited a while for them to before deleting the post if they don’t.

and/or, it would be nice to have a way for us to temporarily semi-delete a post while waiting for OP to make requested changes to it; that is, to hide it from the community view but leave it visible to people with the URL, or people who find it via the user profiles of the poster or commenters in it.

editing titles would be awkward without an edit history or, at the least, a way to see that some 2nd party had edited it, and editing post bodies would be even more so. but it would make sense and be useful with an edit history, i think.

i would also appreciate having content addressability, portable identity, composable moderation, and… perhaps a pony 😂

three suggestions:

1. fyi, since your post links to https://lemmy.world/c/remy and https://lemmy.zip/c/remy icymi the preferred way to link to communities (so that everyone can access them via their own home instance) is like this: !remy@lemmy.zip. When someone types that in the lemmy web interface, it will auto-complete and expand it into link markup like [!remy@lemmy.zip](https://lemmy.zip/c/remy), but when that markup is rendered it will actually become a link to access the community via the reader’s home instance. For instance, for me that link will actually go to https://lemmy.ml/c/remy@lemmy.zip where i can interact with the community whereas https://lemmy.zip/c/remy will take me to the lemmy.zip website where i do not have an account. Here is a non-escaped example (my previous examples are all escaped with backtick characters to prevent them from rendering) which anyone should be able to click to load it through their own instance: !remy@lemmy.zip. Please ensure that your client can both generate and follow community links like this! (as well as user links to lemmy and other activitypub things; user links work the same except they’re prefixed with @ instead of !.)

2. you don’t need multiple communities for your app; users from .world can post on .zip and vice-versa (and it is easy for them to if you link to the community the way described above).

3. will you ever consider open sourcing it? :)

Nope.

Nope, it is.

It allows someone to use code without sharing the changes of that code. It enables non-free software creators like Microsoft to take the code, use it however they like, and not have to share back.

This is correct; it is a permissive license.

This is what Free Software prevents.

No, that is what copyleft (aims to) prevent.

Tired of people calling things like MIT and *BSD true libre/Free Software.

The no True Scotsman fallacy requires a lack of authority about what what constitutes “true” - but in the case of Free/Libre software, we have one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Free_Software_Definition

If you look at this license list (maintained by the Free Software Foundation’s Licensing and Compliance Lab) you’ll see that they classify many non-copyleft licenses as “permissive free software licenses”.

They’re basically one step away from no license at all.

Under the Berne Convention of 1886, everything is copyrighted by default, so “no license at all” means that nobody has permission to redistribute it :)

The differences between permissive free software licenses and CC0 or a simple declaration that something is “dedicated to the public domain” are subtle and it’s easy to see them as irrelevant, but the choice of license does have consequences.

The FSF recommends that people who want to use a permissive license choose Apache 2.0 “for substantial programs” because of its clause which “prevents patent treachery”, while noting that that clause makes it incompatible with GPLv2. For “simple programs” when the author wants a permissive license, FSF recommends the Expat license (aka the MIT license).

It is noteworthy that the latter is compatible with GPLv2; MIT-licensed programs can be included in a GPLv2-only work (like the Linux kernel) while Apache 2.0-licensed programs cannot. (GPLv3 is more accommodating and allows patent-related additional restrictions to be applied, so it is compatible with Apache 2.0.)

What is a U.S.-sanctioned place? Why does the U.S. government think this is a bad thing?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_government_sanctions

🎉 sometimes US sanctions actually do lead to positive outcomes :)

I often see Rust mentioned at the same time as MIT-type licenses. Is it just a cultural thing that people who write Rust dislike Libre licenses?

The word “libre” in the context of licensing exists to clarify the ambiguity of the word “free”, to emphasize that it means “free as in freedom” rather than “free as in beer” (aka no cost, or gratis) as the FSF explains here.

The MIT license is a “libre” license, because it does meet the Free Software Definition.

I think the word you are looking for here is copyleft: the MIT license is a permissive license, meaning it is not a copyleft license.

I don’t know enough about the Rust community to say why, but from a distance my impression is that yes they do appear to have a cultural preference for permissive licenses.

!meshtastic@mander.xyz is the more active of the two lemmy communities about it

Fuck this project, but… their source code can be free and open source even if they distribute binaries which aren’t. (Which they can do if they own the copyright, and/or if it is under a permissive non-copyleft FOSS license.)

And if the source code is actually FOSS, and many people actually want to use it, someone else will distribute FOSS binaries without this stupid EULA. So, this BS is still much better than a non-FOSS license like FUTO’s.