There have been some contributions accepted recently for the PowerPC port, so maybe it will happen! There is a working AI-driven derivative distribution as well. https://github.com/ActionRetro/Tabby-PPC
You can host an alternative repo, with the packaging system it has it's as easy as on any run-of-the-mill Linux distro. The easiest way is just to store your recipes in a repo (I do that: https://github.com/przemub/haikuports-nonfree) but a binary repo can also be easily hosted. In the hybrid architecture Haiku kernel has, drivers can also be loaded at run time. I think it's a good idea, much better than shoehorning into the main repo.
While people have varying stances, I understand the policy at least for the main Haiku repo code. Allowing AI-written contributions means you will get code that neither the contributor nor the teammembers fully understand, and asking questions about the wider context becomes futile. It would require a lot of distrust to get consistently acceptable results.
I think the fact that there are multiple people who have deep understanding of what they are working on and of the system's structure goes a very long way to establish this trust and ensure quality.
In this environment, I think (as I said, the opinions are varying), having the contributor learn about their contribution (even asking AI as a starting point, if they want to) and then (re-)write it themselves is a really minimum gate to make sure everyone knows what is happening.
I think the best glimpse into the future is the bugginess and engineering laziness of Claude Code itself.
New versions ship daily and I seem to hit brand new issues every day. They disappear after a few more updates, but it's damn annoying to keep up instead of doing work, and the direction of changes is lacking at best. The underlying technology otherwise seems nothing short of a miracle, but the contrast is eye-opening.
In industries where this is acceptable, that's the future. In ones that can't tolerate it, it isn't. I hadn't expected software engineering itself to be one of the former but it's kinda obvious in retrospective.
I mean that’s not what Laffer curve says, the only thing it says that the revenue from taxes grows until some tax rate, above which the yield starts decreasing.
This says nothing about the wider economy nor about what the tax rate should be, and on its own it doesn’t seem too controversial to me.
Sure. But there are also a significant number of people who are nostalgic for it and might be offended by this use for that reason, hence why I asked.
Given the existence of both groups I think just the claim that it’s offensive, without explaining why, is ambiguous and just reacting defensively doesn’t address that.
Opinions... There are people with varied opinions on Nazi Germany. That doesn't mean squat.
The USSR eradicated everyone with a deviating opinion about the regime. They perished in the dungeons of the KGB and in the Gulags. What remained were opportunists and followers. Opinions!
Indeed, that accusation of bad faith is such blatant projection ... essentially "It's bad faith to disagree with me, and there's no need for me to justify my claims."
This whole diversion is off topic and can be seen as a form of bad faith.
I’m not even disagreeing, I’m saying that there are different (and somewhat opposed) ways in which someone could find an image offensive, so it’s worthwhile to provide further context.
This is a false equivalence between those who suffered from USSR and those who are ignorant of the suffering of others. I don't think we should care about feelings of a group who are for whatever reason nostalgic about a genocidal oppressive regime.
Would you treat an image of the US House of Representatives the same way? The United States has caused an enormous amount of suffering in the world and has in the past had an explicit policy of genocide and oppression against a number of groups (including my wife’s ancestors), as well as a number of other horrific policies. If you would not treat an image of the US House of Representatives the same way as you treat an image of the Supreme Soviet, it’s worthwhile to interrogate why.
Peoples’ feelings about the nations they are born into and told to love from birth are complex and multifaceted. The people I know who grew up in the USSR have both good and bad things to say about it, just like the people I know who grew up in the USA (like me) at the same time (the 1970s-1990s) have both good and bad things to say about it. And that isn’t just about our own experiences growing up in these respective nations, but about learning our birth nations’ true histories, and how closely (or not) the ideals espoused by their founders and politicians and important figures in their histories were reflected in their actions.
Thus I really, truly do believe it’s ambiguous for someone to say, without any further context, that they find an image of a legislature with some screen shots of an IDE placed into it offensive. Is it offensive because it’s referencing a body they consider evil or is it offensive because it’s trivializing a body they consider good? Without context it’s impossible to know, and acting like everyone shares the same context about this is just refusal to engage with the world as it is rather than the world as you’d like it to be.
Some people use My Little Pony characters as avatars, some use history books characters and propaganda poster characters. It means nothing in itself, people rarely stick to what they preach.
If you think that dumb nostalgia about “good old times” and complete ignorance/acceptance of any murders if they are considered state-sanctioned is somehow different in your own country (any country at any time), you must come to conclusion that some people inherently have lesser “quality” than others based on papers that they are given at birth by this or that organisation calling itself a state. Problematic, as they say.
