You do not pay anything different for AI prompts. You should really actually try the product before you make up all these things about it.
But what you pay involves the calculated cost of using the AI, otherwise they’d be losing money if a lot of users were to make too many prompts. So it should be possible to have a lower price that didn’t give you any prompts.
...so might as well say that "agent" is simply the next buzzword, since people aren't so excited with the concept of artificial intelligence any more
This is exactly the reason for the emphasis on it.
The reality is that the LLMs are impressive and nice to play with. But investors want to know where the big money will come from, and for companies, LLMs aren’t that useful in their current state, I think one of the biggest use for them is extracting information from documents with lots of text.
So “agents” are supposed to be LLMs executing actions instead of just outputting text (such as calling APIs). Which doesn’t seem like the best idea considering they’re not great at all at making decisions—despite these companies try to paint them as capable of such.
This is why technically software is a liability. The less code you need, the better, since every line of code is a potential vulnerability and something to maintain, update, etc.
If the distro is rolling release, it can always support the latest software in theory, you’d just need to have the correct package formula, which is exactly what AUR offers.
The problem with AUR is just that the author of the package is likely not the author of the software and not affiliated with the distro, so you should normally check what the script is doing.
I really understand how hard is maintaining something for every single package manager and distributions
But for apps distributed in your system’s package manager, it’s not the devs that are distributing them in every package manager. It’s the distribution itself that goes to each repository, checks and tests the dependencies they need and creates the package for the distribution, along with a compiled binary.
When they aren’t offered in the distro’s package manager (or the version is outdated because the distro isn’t rolling release) things become more complicated indeed, and sometimes you can’t even do it because the dependencies are older than the ones you require.
It could serve both as an explanation of concepts and references to the sources, just like Wikipedia. Ex: it could have pages about Kindle, about Chrome etc. detailing the privacy problems, the timeline of news about them and so on…
Sure it would be a lot of work to have a lot of information, but if it’s something other people can help contribute it could actually grow as a knowledge repository on this subject.
What you’re saying is right about the possibility, but when you’re assessing some software for yourself, you have to consider things in the bigger perspective.
Some protects are very complex and require multiple teams of developers to maintain. That’s different than a small project that one person can maintain and curate external contributions.
So something like Chromium or Flutter isn’t the type of software that a community will self organize and maintain, they need some sort of organization behind them. This organization will probably need some sort of funding, ex: donations. Otherwise the projects will either fall into chaos and die or they’ll look for other ways to support themselves (ex: Qt with their commercial license and paywalled features).
In practice everything needs resources and without these resources any project simply dies.
Brands want to push their own style on people, to make themselves recognizable, and to push their ideas about UX to their users
That’s not a universal behavior though. There’s so many utilities and simpler apps made by indie developers or smaller companies that don’t care about this.
At the same time, I feel like nowadays there's less forums or places people can ask help with, although today ChatGPT can be a good help with newbie questions.
You’re right, but that’s not the point. The other poster said it’s a skill issue. Sure, if the person can’t run commands in a terminal or doesn’t know what’s an executable that’s a skill issue.
Getting stuck because the game is having weird glitches that show off once in a while and you need classes on computer graphics to debug isn’t skill issues imo. Otherwise are all gonna establish that Linux isn’t for non programmers then?
Another option is to have enough people in the company interested in using that to justify it.
In my company (a large bank) Linux is now being rolled out to selected people as test because there was enough interest from a lot of the backend crowd.
But what you pay involves the calculated cost of using the AI, otherwise they’d be losing money if a lot of users were to make too many prompts. So it should be possible to have a lower price that didn’t give you any prompts.