So, are you saying that skills are not such a good tool for agents to learn, they still need tool-trial-and-error dance after injecting them? (I'm assuming each tool comes with its own skill.)
> You aren't really contributing anything except funding to Anthropic/oai/MS/etc if you're sending genAI content.
Why people keep saying that I'm advocating for AI use? I'm not happy with the decision of Ladybird maintainers, but that doesn't mean I'm willing to spam them with AI slop.
But opensource has always been about community. This way it becomes "source-open", even if you could make changes to it and run those changes yourself, the latter doesn't sound "opensourcy" to me.
Don't put words in my ~mouth~ (keyboard) that I didn't ~say~ (type), I'm not saying I want my contributions to be accepted on equal footing even if they are generated by AI. What I'm saying is that solving this problem this way is going to make opensource much worse. We need a better way, and I'm not sure which is the better way, sorry.
I don't know about you, but as for me, when I contribute to opensource it's because I find some improvement that makes the project better because it probably polishes some rough edge around a kind-of particular use case (that maybe few people face, but still, it makes the project better for them; it amplifies the range of usecases that it can span to). If everybody does the same with their small improvements, the project becomes better for everyone, but none of the contributors of these small changes would have time to embark on maintaining a fork. Mantaining a fork is hard work, not only because software breaks over time (dependencies going obsolete or insecure, builds stop working because of old toolkits), but also because not pulling the latest changes from master would mean that your fork gets stagnated (and thus not worth to run it).
While I understand the motivation for this change, I have to highlight something: GitHub's slogan 'social coding' is becoming more and more true these days. Now opensource will become a thing that only "influential" people can contribute to. We're back to nepotism, not meritocracy. Down hill we go.
Ok I guess my mind didn't think "entire surface of the earth" would really mean entire surface of the earth because that's just abhorrently stupid. I mean, in order to cover the entire surface of the earth with datacenters, we would first need to build stuff on the entire surface of the earth... Which would take... thousands of years? And I'm sure we would grow some trees on top of the data-centers along the way.
Errr.. are you saying that Linux contributors are only affiliated to small companies or volunteers? Well, last time I checked, some contributors were RedHat(IBM) and Microsoft employees ;)