this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2023
28 points (100.0% liked)
Linux
48165 readers
1204 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The increasing popularity of NixOS can be attributed to several factors that make it stand out among other Linux distributions. Some of the key reasons why people are switching to NixOS include:
Reproducibility: NixOS allows for reproducible builds and deployments, ensuring that the same code will produce the same output across different environments[1][2].
Easy rollbacks: NixOS has built-in rollbacks, which means that if a configuration change causes the system to be unbootable, it is easy to roll back to a previous working install[1][3].
Nix package manager: NixOS uses the Nix package manager, which simplifies package management and system configuration[1].
Multiple versions of the same package: NixOS allows users to have multiple versions of the same package installed, which can be useful for testing and development purposes[1].
Stability: NixOS is considered a very stable platform compared to other Linux distributions, such as Arch Linux[3].
Declarative configuration: NixOS uses a declarative configuration approach, which offers benefits over the imperative approach used by more traditional operating systems[4].
In addition to these features, the recent introduction of the open-source platform flox has made it easier for developers and enterprises to adopt NixOS. Flox expands on Nix's unique approach to package management and system configuration, providing convenience, collaboration, and control throughout the Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC) [5]. This has led to an increase in the adoption of NixOS among developers and enterprises.
Overall, NixOS offers a combination of stability, reproducibility, and flexibility that appeals to developers and users who want a reliable and customizable Linux distribution.
Citations:
[1] https://itsfoss.com/why-use-nixos/
[2] https://techcrunch.com/2023/02/07/flox-raises-27m-to-bring-nix-to-more-developers/
[3] https://ramsdenj.com/2017/06/19/switching-to-nixos-from-arch-linux.html
[4] https://www.anthes.is/nixos-pros-cons.html
[5] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/flox-raises-27-million-introduces-140100442.html
this comment reads suspiciously like it was written by an LLM (eg ChatGPT). was it? please don't do that!
Do LLMs give citations? Otherwise, I could agree.
do they ever!
(The citations in this comment appear to be all real links about NixOS, but they are not particularly relevant to the places in the comment where they're cited.)
@dessalines@lemmy.ml @AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml @wazowski@lemmy.ml @k_o_t@lemmy.ml @nutomic@lemmy.ml @kixiQu@lemmy.ml an admin is telling me not to use LLMs. Is this the official stance of this instance? If so, please let me know so I can find another instance and add it to the rules, if not please choose admins that actually enforce the instance rules without making them up.
If OP wanted a response from an LLM, they would have typed their question into an LLM. The least you could do is label it as such.
I use an LLM to edit everything I write. Does this mean I have to label everything as LLM-generated? I am the one doing the job, but in the end, I'm just copy-pasting the output from the LLM.
Rule or not, it's pretty lame, look at the size of your post compared to how much info it gives, had you copied a article from some basic linux news stite, it would have given mostly the same output, now think about what linking a page to an article about nixos as a response to op trying to start a conversation about it would look like, rude.
May I invite you to consider the pitfalls of such an approach?
Yes, that would be reasonable imo
I think you should.
Why don't you label your name in every answer, so we can check if you are hallucinating or making things up?
You mean like a username that is listed in the header of every post and comment?
What?
I'm also curious why you feel the need to have an LLM edit your writing. What did you do before an LLM? And what benefit do you feel the LLM writing your comments is offering you and those reading your comments?
I don't need to explain myself. I wouldn't do it if I didn't think it helped.
Why are you defensive? If you felt it was actually helping, you should be able to articulate how.
I feel attacked, obviously, because I shouldn't have to explain my reasons for using an LLM, just like other people don't have to explain themselves when they use an autocomplete tool on their phone.
Nobody is writing sentences with autocomplete, much less entire comments. It corrects spelling, or at most homonyms or the like. Nobody is starting a sentence and pressing autocomplete to see where it goes.
And you should have to explain why you are using an LLM. Other people aren't, and they're doing just fine. You've said you think it helps in some way, but you can't or won't say why. That is odd to me. Do you not have confidence in your own ability to write?
Edit to add: As another commenter said, if someone wants an LLM's answer, they can just ask an LLM. If you think you're saving them that time and energy and asking the LLM and relaying the answer, then mark your comment as such (though IMO it's still useless for you to post that). You having an LLM write a comment and passing it off as a human response is disingenuous at best.
And you ask why I'm defensive. You keep pushing, even though I've already told you that I won't explain myself. If tomorrow, every spellchecker used LLMs to complete phrases instead of words, would you ask everyone to explain why they're using them?
I find it more and more suspicious that you're unable to articulate why you're using an LLM to write your comments. And since you are pursuing this line of false equivalency between an LLM writing your entire comment, and something spellchecking what you've written, I don't suspect you're going to attempt a discussion. Maybe bring an LLM here so I can talk to it; it won't be so obtuse.
Using an LLM to autocorrect your own words is not the same as copy-pasting an LLM response.
I swear, LLMs are really giving people the You made this...I made this meme a rebirth.
I'll type things up and ask an LLM like petals or open assistant to phrase it in new or clearer way. Hit or miss, but sometimes it helps.
thanks for clarifying. i'm deleting your generated comment per rule 4 (spamming) as well as two other generated comments you posted elsewhere; if another admin wants to undelete any of these i would be surprised.
please do not post LLM-generated comments without clearly labeling them as such. imo this is common sense, and doesn't need its own rule, rule 4 is sufficient.
I don't know whether just using an LLM is a problem. But in your case I would say the fact you used one and didn't indicate you did. If you indicated the answer came from an LLM, then the trust in the answer could be weighted accordingly by each user.
That's my opinion at any rate.
The admins did not remove the comment, a community mod did. Mods can impose further restrictions on their communities on top of instance wide rules (within reason of course), including banning LLMs. Lemmy.ml at least does not have a blanket ban on LLMs, but generally it's expected that, 1, you should not post LLMs excessively, we mainly want to host discussions by humans, 2, you should disclose it's from an LLM and which one it's from, and preferably add to what it says with your own comments or analysis. If it's a mix of LLM and your own writing, say so at the start of the comment, but if the community directly disallows LLMs then you shouldn't post it there at all.
So basically promote software for free? No thanks, bye. I won't attribute everything I write to an LLM.
Under the soon to be enacted EU AI laws such a bot would be limited-risk application (interaction with humans), the requirements for a text bot aren't particularly high but also non-negotiable from a best practice POV: Stating front and centre that it's an AI generated post. It's also best practice to fulfil criteria necessary for high-risk systems voluntarily, the more you can fulfil I bet the less hostile people are going to be.
The library of congress has an executive summary of the thing.
(EU sources alas are a bit iffy at the moment there's the commission version and the parliament amendments, haven't seen a consolidated version yet. When will politicians start using proper VCS)
I use an LLM to edit everything I write. Does this mean I have to label everything as LLM-generated? I am the one doing the job, but in the end, I'm just copy-pasting the output from the LLM.
If your sources don't match the claims no you're not doing "the job" necessary to classify things as LLM-assisted instead of LLM-generated.
Try not using an LLM to write what you..uh..write.
You suck
Do you use Nix, personally? Also, it's crazy that I found this post while thinking about distro hopping.
The above poster seems to use more ChatGPT than Nix, personally.
I would love to have #4 on Arch / EndeavourOS.I recently had my Scribus install (SVN from the AUR) break due to Arch moving to some newer library. There really isn't an easy way to solve this AFAIK.
This is clearly a chatgpt post that you made references for