That’s fair. It would certainly align with the described “spirit” of the policy. Hopefully it becomes clearer in the future.

Very considerate of you to await him at the destination.

Unless you’re doing something extremely common with well-established patterns, search engines have sucked for the past 14 years and been unusable for the past 8. For most of that time I would just refer to official docs, and official code examples, avoiding stackoverflow and other forums since they were just filled with outdated or plain bad info.

Search engines like Kagi might still be decent, but they are few.

I rely on it to scour the docs, the forums, the codebases for any and all potential solutions and neatly present them to me. I then validate and evaluate myself. Just going with the first thing the AI suggests is lunacy and is exactly what I meant by “people are still discovering best practices”.

It’s literally the first sentence of their policy.

Yes, but what about the 2nd sentence?

The following is not allowed in Nura:

• Submitting contributions fully or in part created by generative AI tools to Nura.
• Recommending generative AI tools to other community members for solving problems in the Nura space.

As you can see, it says nothing about researching, troubleshooting, reverse-engineering, etc. As long as you write and understand the code yourself AI is allowed for everything else. As long as you’re not using generative AI it’s fine.

Citation needed.

My personal experience working with AI over the past year. And if that’s not enough, here’s also Linus Torvalds himself.

The arguments regarding resource use and profiting off of theft are valid. The arguments regarding the nature and capabilities of the tech are not. Developers ARE responsible for the code they submit, regardless of how it was created.

Yeah, I personally prefer the bug-free old version:

On a more serious note, we’re still in a period where people are figuring out what AI can/cannot be used for and what the best practices are. Ironically, since it’s better at reverse engineering and bug hunting than developing when compared to a human, it is more useful for hacker and open-source projects than enterprise.

Cautiously optimistic. I can sense a faint glow radiating off of those phones. Or I might just be imagining things…

Just dual boot?

Linus Torvalds = Linux Linus Sebastian ≠ Linux

Good for entertainment. Never take anything they say seriously.

If you actually found a solution I would be very interested. Looking forward to it!

I was investigating this some time ago when I wanted to remote login into my work PC on my local network so that I didnt need a KVM or multiple monitors and peripherals.

Fundamentally this works great in X11 because the core required for this is implemented in X11. Meaning it was easy to create software for this use-case no matter the DE.

Wayland is much more “hollow” in this regard. A lot of features that were core to X11 have been offloaded to the window manager. And by offloaded I mean “we do not handle this stuff, figure it out DE devs!”

This means that for what we want, the DE itself needs to implement it. Gnome does have a remote login feature that might fit the bill. KDE has made 0 attempts at implementing it. Not sure where the rest stand.

TL;DR: Merged code has to meet existing quality standards. What tools were used to create it is irrelevant.

Your best bet might be a keyboard with QMK/VIA support. Bake those shortcuts directly into the keyboard firmware.

I bit the bullet when I got a 3D printer. 0 experience in any CAD or 3D modeling software. Took me a while to understand the basic concepts of a parametric CAD, but it has been well worth it.

Archlinux. The wiki and forums are comprehensive, occasional issues I create easy to google, surprisingly reliable. AUR makes it easy to install third-party software.

For the above mentioned reasons, I would recommend you go with one of the big 3: Debian, Fedora, or Arch. Most other distros are either derived from one of the 3 anyways, or are niche.

Long time linux user: The worse problem is they don’t even tell WHICH manual is relevant to the issue.

“How do I make my secondary drive auto-decrypt?” “RTFM”

Could have at least said “man crypttab 5” so that I don’t have to waste 3 hours just trying to find the starting point.

One word: chaos engineering!

Same as always - by coding.

If more people were contributing there wouldn’t be a need for AI.