I don't think 'true free market libertarians' exist. They only want free market because it benefits them at the specific time or circumstances they want it.

I more and more think that there is just one dimension starting by authoritarian and ending with social.

Faschistst, Tankies, free market libertarians, autocrats and feudalists, are just authoritarians in with different origins. Their team should be in power, their team should be supported by everyone, while they profit from it.

While social people want nobody to suffer, everyone to be in power and have self a determination, etc.

And nobody really knows if numbers exist, if there is nobody there to count.

Usually sure, but as we see with drive assistants, getting more and more advanced, and potentially resist the control of the driver, then the manufacturer could become liable.

Question is: Who is the person controlling the AI?

The one that allowed the agent to do stuff on its own?

The one that wrote the sandbox, that didn't work?

The one that wrote the user prompt?

The one that wrote the system prompt?

The one that provides the tools to the AI agent to do stuff?

The one that hosts the model?

The one that fine-tuned or post trained the model?

The one that pretrained the model?

The people that provided the input data to the model?

Oh, you are another shot aircraft poster?

"Toupée fallacy"? Interesting, I only know that as survivorship or selection bias.

Json Carter

Yeah... But LM has spotify, Google Earth, Dropbox and Sublime Texteditor mixed in open source software (like d-feet, a dbus inspection tool) in their repos... Those aren't propritary Codecs, WiFi driver or firmware...

Debian and Ubuntu have different APT repo sections for closed source stuff. That is what I would have expected...

I don't care if a Linux distribution offers proprietary applications or not. I just want to be able to filter it out, and that they offer open alternatives first.

I'm not a purist, I want people to be informed users, not just sheep that get fed whatever corporations want them to eat. If they still choose to use closed source software, then that is fine.

I'm in an organization that helps people install Linux on their devices, and we collectively decided to install Linux Mint. I never used it myself, and to me, the distribution doesn't matter too much.

However, I was negatively surprised that Linux Mint decided to mix closed-source proprietary software together with open-source software: http://packages.linuxmint.com/search.php?release=alfa&section=import&keyword=

They also advertise them in top positions on their package installers, which also doesn't show the packages licenses anywhere. To me advertising them and mixing them like they are the same is bad... They also don't offer ways to filter them out... So... while I still install LM for others, I'm not a fan....