"Claude watermarks your code now."
Dude. It's not yours, you didn't write it.
last year The Linux Foundation had $300 million in revenue in 2025.
can't hire a designer.
absolutely pathetic.
RE: https://nileane.fr/@nileane/117094103503360926
For my English-speaking audience:
Macron's recent law that was adopted in Parliament earlier this year and set to impose a nationwide ban on social media for under-15-year-olds via systematic age verification, was just declared unconstitutional by the French Constitutional Council.
Namely on these grounds:
โข the council considers the law disproportionately infringes on the freedom of expression of minors,
โข it considers that the establishment of a nationwide age verification system may have dire consequences for any citizen's right to privacy.
there is nothing these days that has the vibe of cyanogenmod. ad-hoc wifi support built-in? a completely custom system theming engine?
WHY IS THIS NOT ALIVE ANYMORE??
type of programmer who, when their C code does an out-of-bound read then crashes, moves their hands up & down and says "SIGSEGV-en"
did you know that you can run Alpine in things that are not docker containers?
If you use #Linux on your desktop, the foundation you *should* support is not the Linux foundation, but rather the @XOrgFoundation AKA freedesktop.org. The X.Org foundation is the home of:
- #X11
- #Wayland
- #Mesa
- #Noveau
- #DBus
- #GRUB
- #GStreamer
- #PulseAudio
- #PipeWire
- #NetworkManager
- the Linux kernel graphics subsystem
- the #XDG base directory specification
- and more!
Also, development of what would later become #Flatpak started here.
These projects have a way stronger impact on your day-to-day computing experience than anything managed by the Linux foundation.
imagine putting "๐ซ No Lamers" on such a Claude-looking website (or, what the fuck happened to efnet.org)
Doesn't seem like Nate Graham AKA pointieststick, of KDE fame, has a fedi account, so I'll just share his article here myself:
https://pointieststick.com/2026/07/19/whos-responsible-for-bug-reports-on-old-software-versions/
It's a nice read, and the article about what "LTS" actually means that he links to inside the post, gets straight to the core of the issue. Nate's communication style is examplary and something to take note of.
One of the open source projects I used to (many years ago, so I am not really affected anymore) has recently decided to allow AI contributions. One of their arguments is that they judge submissions on quality, not tools used.
Back when I was an active contributor (to the project and maintainer of some other parts of the surrounding ecosystem), I got a lot of submissions that were bad.
The thing is, I absolutely loved getting these because they always came from super-enthusiastic junior people. Reviewing them and giving feedback often too much longer than implementing the feature myself. The same was usually true for the next contribution too. But that shifted over time. After a few months, I started getting patches where I didnโt find anything beyond the cosmetic that I wanted to change.
Going back further, I was one of those people when I started contributing.
Measured as code contributions over the short term, maintainers working with submitters of poor-quality PRs is a waste of time. Youโre taking time away from writing code to do something that produces code more slowly.
Measured over the long term, the results are very different. Far more code in that project and closely related parts of the ecosystem has been written by people who I mentored when they came along with some bad code than by me.
Itโs never a waste of my time to turn an enthusiastic and incompetent contributor into an enthusiastic and competent contributor, itโs an absolutely critical part of building a healthy project. I wouldnโt have got nearly as much out of F/OSS on a personal level if I hadnโt encountered a lot of people with the same opinion when I was one of the enthusiastic and incompetent newcomers.
But LLMs are not like that. If I spend time reviewing LLM-generated code when it would have been faster to write it myself (which, to be clear, is the case on 100% of LLM-submitted PRs Iโve seen so far), then thatโs just a time sink. Itโs also taking away time I could be spending helping new contributors who want to actually improve, rather than just take the review comments, feed them into an opaque system, and give me back the results.