4 ms·

> It's absolutely rediculous that supporting something, thats opt-in not opt-out is causing a ruckus lol, people really have too much fuckin time on their hands

> It's absolutely rediculous that supporting something, thats opt-in not opt-out is causing a ruckus lol, people really have too much fuckin time on their hands to bitch about things. People have preferences. They find their preferences meaningful to them. This means there will always be a healthy competitive market of alternatives to choose from in order to serve those preferences. This is not a bad outcome. Why do you find it "worthy of ridicule?"

whimsicalism 2y ago
preferences aren't above criticism, i see many people on the internet with the misapprehension that just because "it's an opinion" somehow ought to shield you from people being able to say "that's a dumb opinion"
- akira2501 2y ago
  > preferences aren't above criticism Sure. I just wouldn't expect to get particularly far with that strategy. > ought to shield you from people being able to say "that's a dumb opinion" We're talking about a preference of which terminal emulator to use. Is there some larger social consequence that should be addressed this way? Having openly genocidal racist attitudes are "dumb opinions" that are worthy of public challenge. Whether or not I want to use iTerm2 because they added LLM interfaces is probably not.
  - whimsicalism 2y ago
    i feel like you are treating 'dumb' as synonymous with 'reprehensible'. worthy of public challenge? we're commenting on an internet forum. not using a terminal because it has added a feature that is opt-in seems silly to me, it doesn't have to be racist or genocidal to reach the threshold of 'worthy to comment on'
  - paulmd 2y ago
    you’re being silly on this just as much as you’re being silly about iterm yes, in the context of an internet discussion about iterm we can of course say that you’re being silly, even if genocide exists. Don’t be silly. not exactly like the front page of the NYT is discussing akira2501’s iterm stance instead of genocide, here, you’re just having an emotional tantrum over some random computer thing. people have just gotten silly over this whole thing, visceral emotional reaction is about right.
benced 2y ago
Because they’re going beyond their personal preference - which could be fulfilled by never using this feature - by trying to press their legitimate preferences onto others by blackballing companies that even touch LLMs.
- akira2501 2y ago
  > beyond their personal preference My preference is to not use software which has these features in it. I don't need my terminal software having a network request layer which can exfiltrate my data to unknown third parties. You might feel comfortable with a labeled "off switch" but many of us do not. Is that an allowed preference? Or should I be ridiculed? > press their legitimate preferences onto others You mean describe their preferences openly and allow others to come to their own conclusion? Or are you suggesting that they're bullying other people into this position against their will? To me it seems the opposite. Whenever these criticisms come up there is a contingent dedicated to minimizing them to the point of suggesting that they should be openly ridiculed. Or that they've misunderstood their own preferences. Or that they've taken them "too far" somehow. > by blackballing companies that even touch LLMs. Yes, preferences even extend to economic decisions. People often forget that this is the basis of all economy.
  - benced 2y ago
    iTerm has had a font fetcher, a crash reporter, and an automatic updater that all hit the internet for a while. Did anyone care? Is there anybody who turned off the crash reporter but started a fairly mean-spirited thread that the crash reporter was still in the binary? Is there anybody who didn't bother reading the code for what the crash reporter did and expressed that they're not "comfortable with a labeled 'off switch'"? Seems like this preference only comes up when the endpoint is an LLM. It's an isolated demand for rigor rooted in the visceral emotions LLMs seem to inspire.
    - bingo-bongo 2y ago
      iTerm did have at least one rather serious data leaking bug in the past. It was introduced in a new feature and enabled by default. People (or power users at least) tend to remember incidents like that. I don’t think it’s entirely “just because LLM’s”.
m463 2y ago
> there will always be a healthy competitive market of alternatives I'm not complaining about iTerm2, but this statement on its own is not true. For example - a healthy competitive market for phones that respect your privacy. Cars without touchscreen controls for everything. Televisions that are not "smart". Honestly, I hope that iterm2 gets a "local AI" feature. Running a local LLM or stable diffusion is fun.
- akira2501 2y ago
  That was specifically to the world of open source. I can't do anything about our government failing to enforce anti trust laws that have existed for more than a century. If they did enforce them then perhaps this statement would have wider truth to it.

whimsicalism 2y ago

preferences aren't above criticism, i see many people on the internet with the misapprehension that just because "it's an opinion" somehow ought to shield you from people being able to say "that's a dumb opinion"

akira2501 2y ago
> preferences aren't above criticism Sure. I just wouldn't expect to get particularly far with that strategy. > ought to shield you from people being able to say "that's a dumb opinion" We're talking about a preference of which terminal emulator to use. Is there some larger social consequence that should be addressed this way? Having openly genocidal racist attitudes are "dumb opinions" that are worthy of public challenge. Whether or not I want to use iTerm2 because they added LLM interfaces is probably not.
- whimsicalism 2y ago
  i feel like you are treating 'dumb' as synonymous with 'reprehensible'. worthy of public challenge? we're commenting on an internet forum. not using a terminal because it has added a feature that is opt-in seems silly to me, it doesn't have to be racist or genocidal to reach the threshold of 'worthy to comment on'
- paulmd 2y ago
  you’re being silly on this just as much as you’re being silly about iterm yes, in the context of an internet discussion about iterm we can of course say that you’re being silly, even if genocide exists. Don’t be silly. not exactly like the front page of the NYT is discussing akira2501’s iterm stance instead of genocide, here, you’re just having an emotional tantrum over some random computer thing. people have just gotten silly over this whole thing, visceral emotional reaction is about right.

benced 2y ago

Because they’re going beyond their personal preference - which could be fulfilled by never using this feature - by trying to press their legitimate preferences onto others by blackballing companies that even touch LLMs.

akira2501 2y ago
> beyond their personal preference My preference is to not use software which has these features in it. I don't need my terminal software having a network request layer which can exfiltrate my data to unknown third parties. You might feel comfortable with a labeled "off switch" but many of us do not. Is that an allowed preference? Or should I be ridiculed? > press their legitimate preferences onto others You mean describe their preferences openly and allow others to come to their own conclusion? Or are you suggesting that they're bullying other people into this position against their will? To me it seems the opposite. Whenever these criticisms come up there is a contingent dedicated to minimizing them to the point of suggesting that they should be openly ridiculed. Or that they've misunderstood their own preferences. Or that they've taken them "too far" somehow. > by blackballing companies that even touch LLMs. Yes, preferences even extend to economic decisions. People often forget that this is the basis of all economy.
- benced 2y ago
  iTerm has had a font fetcher, a crash reporter, and an automatic updater that all hit the internet for a while. Did anyone care? Is there anybody who turned off the crash reporter but started a fairly mean-spirited thread that the crash reporter was still in the binary? Is there anybody who didn't bother reading the code for what the crash reporter did and expressed that they're not "comfortable with a labeled 'off switch'"? Seems like this preference only comes up when the endpoint is an LLM. It's an isolated demand for rigor rooted in the visceral emotions LLMs seem to inspire.
  - bingo-bongo 2y ago
    iTerm did have at least one rather serious data leaking bug in the past. It was introduced in a new feature and enabled by default. People (or power users at least) tend to remember incidents like that. I don’t think it’s entirely “just because LLM’s”.

m463 2y ago

> there will always be a healthy competitive market of alternatives I'm not complaining about iTerm2, but this statement on its own is not true. For example - a healthy competitive market for phones that respect your privacy. Cars without touchscreen controls for everything. Televisions that are not "smart". Honestly, I hope that iterm2 gets a "local AI" feature. Running a local LLM or stable diffusion is fun.

akira2501 2y ago
That was specifically to the world of open source. I can't do anything about our government failing to enforce anti trust laws that have existed for more than a century. If they did enforce them then perhaps this statement would have wider truth to it.