Luminous5481 [they/them]

Let’s Encrypt is a trusted, established alternative, it could replace Microsoft for long-lived software certificates.

Uh, no it could not.

First of all, the whole point of signing software is to ensure it comes from a reputable source. Let’s Encrypt signs certificates with an automated process that does no verification whatsoever of the identity of the person asking for a certificate. It would make the whole process completely pointless.

Second, Let’s Encrypt has stated themselves over a decade ago that they have no intention of doing this because it would render the whole system pointless.

I know you’re feeling very self-righteous right now, but I hope at some point you can calm down enough to step back and realize this is such a silly thing to be getting so dramatic over.

it’s not really a question of working or not, is it? it’s a question of what words mean. if somebody says why isn’t an orange considered an apple, it’s perfectly normal to say it’s because they’re two different things. you wouldn’t say, “do what works for you, make an apple pie with oranges”, would you?

bethesda would be delighted to charge you another $60 for that privilege.

the one you posted is www.youtube.com/watch?v=@LoveLinuxxMint

the URL should be www.youtube.com/@LoveLinuxxMint

the link you shared doesn’t exist, because you tacked on the bit for watching a video: watch?v=

the URL should be updated to https://www.youtube.com/@LoveLinuxxMint

self hosted. I don’t use anything from a corporation that I don’t absolutely have to.

It’s absolutely a fair comparison. An LLM can’t use any more than 100% of the system resources. neither can a video game. for an individual, there’s no practical difference between being an avid gamer and someone who uses LLMs if you’re comparing environmental impact.

if you don’t agree, then perhaps you could explain to me how using 100% of my GPU for an LLM is different than using 100% of my GPU for Cyberpunk 2077? both use cases are using the same amount of power, so how is one use worse for the environment than the other? especially since I might use an LLM for a few minutes of work, whereas I’ve had many, many days where I spend 8 hours or more gaming. surely my gaming causes far more damage to the environment than my using LLMs does, but perhaps you’re more educated on the matter than I am and can show me otherwise.

LLMs as a technology are also extremely inefficient and resource intensive; by writing yourself off as “just one person” doing it we’re ignoring the global effect of many “one persons” all consuming resources by using this technology.

the same can be said of gaming. criticizing LLMs for being resource intensive even for individual use would be hypocritical if you’re not also criticising gamers for using their PCs to their full potential while gaming.

our revenue is down close to 80%

oof. that’s not something very many groups come back from. losing that much of their business and team, the project is on life support.

That’s nonsense. They would be selling the poor to the AI. Think the Matrix, but it’s powering a stock market machine that makes money for Bezos.