This isn’t exactly what I was searching for, I was more interested in the “independant farms” part

In France, most “family ran” farms work on rented land and under an exclusivity contract that forces them to sell all their production to a single company. This leads to a situation where the few billionaires that buy food from everyone get to set the prices at which they buy different crops (and therefore what the farmers produce), and whether to export it. In other news, France is exporting wine while malnutrition rises and the major food charity is running out of fund as the demand increases. The government has stepped in to fund the charity, but still, we end up prioritizing exporting alcohol over feeding locals.

I would be more interested in how the system decides what is exported and produced, rather than in what is currently exported and produced

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Writing_articles_with_large_language_models

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:LLM-assisted_translation

The two related “policies” are rather short, you should read them if you haven’t.

AI shouldn’t be altering databases of knowledge, especially when it is so inconsistent

The policy only allows usage as an auto-translater (a task at which they are not worst than old-style auto-translaters that were always allowed) and as spellcheck/grammarcheck (where it is also not worst than other allowed options).

None of those tools were previously seen as altering Wikipedia by themselves. The goal is that LLMs should be used and considered like they were.

To be clear they always were articles for creation submitted from clearly google-translated text, and they always were dismissed as slop. To get an autotranslated article accepted, you need to clean it up until all the information is correct and the grammar is good enough. This is a rather standard workflow for translations. The same thing should apply to LLMs.

The new issue here is that LLMs can “organically” change informations while asked to translate. When a classic autotranslate changes the information, it often (not always) leaves a notable mess in the grammar. LLMs will insert their errors much more cleanly. This is acknowledged by both texts and, well, texts will change if that becomes a reocurring issue.

That sounds impressive, I never heard about it. Do you have some resource about it? I don’t know how to search for it and Google is, like, you know

So, yeah, flatpak is horribly inneficient on disk usage and can easily take 60GB if you are a bit generous on app installs. 60GB is, notably, less than 1.4TB

Out of curiosity, how did you search for what was using up the space? Did you try apps like baobab or filelight? One of them is usually preinstalled and they have not failed me yet (except when hard-linking or copy-on-write is involved, but that shouldn’t show up on the global disk usage percentage)

man is a woman-made problem if that helps

Making food from pure electricity would be a cool sci-fi thing

Regardless of nationality, don’t expect your billionaire overlord to have ethics if it comes at the cost of a 0.7% income loss

It’s flatpak. Not snap, by god, not snap.

It’s inefficient, but he is stating that he is now using “only 600GB”, so I would guess it shouldn’t be that notable to someone who thinks 600GB is not much.

I used to dislike it, but consider that Flatpak is allowing a lot of small distros to exist outside of Debian/RHEL/Arch. Void, Chimera, Adélie or Guix (insert yours here) “only” have to implement a desktop environment and Flatpak to be usable. It’s not ideal and it kind of goes against the point of those distros, but they definitely couldn’t package Flathub’s 3300 apps themselves. Especially the proprietary ones that only provide a .deb and .rpm.

Also the sandboxing is nice when installing proprietary stuff. I don’t want Microsoft Team drooling all over my stuff.

It would not https://vikdevelop.github.io/SaveDesktop/

It will be unlabeled and reduced in quantity, as LLM users will feel unwelcome and there is not much point in contributing to a project that doesn’t want you. You don’t always need your policy to be perfect, you just need it to make things better than before