Of course they can, and I underline that in my comment several times, that this person is free to do it, good for them. I don't disagree with that at all. I'm sure they will learn a lot and that's great.
And everyone else is free to evaluate the prospects and realities of that fork.
Why do you say it's an amazing project? Looks to me like someone copied vim, and according to the commits did nothing useful other than changing some text in a few files. The author's comments are all about coming up with a cool name for it, and what "cool" new features to add. I don't see any plan on actually making this a viable competing project. I don't see the author having much credentials in leading a project of this caliber either.
Before anyone misunderstands my comment, yes anyone not liking AI should stop using vim, I very much agree. And there are two viable ways forward:
Switch to a different editor
Talk to the maintainers of vim to remove AI
This project is not one of them.
Where is the author's plan to tackle the 1600 issues that vim has open? How do they address the fact that vim has hundreds of commits each month, and literally had 68 contributors in just the last month? In the past month they closed 66 issues with vim. Half of vim's codebase is written in vimscript, and the other half in C. The new lead maintainer, I quote: "thankfully i know some C, but not vimscript". They know some C and no vimscript? So how do they plan to develop this project?!
Another quote: "removing old targets, stripping away graphical stuff (who uses this in graphical mode anyways? everyone uses it in the CLI...", and they already plan to drop Windows support.
Already ignoring user's needs and removing functionality. Now, they are perfectly entitled to do whatever in their fork. But how is it a viable competitor to vim in any way?
Even assuming the worst case scenario on what damage AI can do to the progress of vim's development, who can seriously suggest that 1 person who doesn't even know the relevant programming langagues can make a better project than hundreds of experienced contributors that are doing it for years, AI or not?
And again, all the power to them, they can have some fun with their fork. But it's ridicoulus to suggest it as an alternative. Two years from now, vim will have fixed ~1500 issues at the current rate. And will have a bunch of new ones due to AI. Meanwhile this project will be dead, and the latest version will have 1500 unfixed issues that are all fixed in vim.
Taking a stance again AI in vim? Do it, campaign for it, talk to the maintainers, effect change, review PRs and comment about the AI mistakes you see, submit bug reports for bugs caused by AI and make a case for forbidding it's use. You have my full support. This fork? It's obviously going nowhere, it's a waste of effort that could be used to actually stop AI.
Yeah but so could my ISP, and all in all I find it more likely my ISP would, than that NordVPN would. I don't trust either, but I definitely trust my ISP less.
What I meant probably didn't carry over through text well. I was being very literal because you were very literal – to show the problem with that.
Yes, obviously you didn't mean it would actually be illegal in all countries that exist.
My point is that the "zero-humans" naming also doesn't actually mean zero humans. There is someone controlling whatever that project is.
Can you quote the relevant part of the bill? I don't see it. From what I'm reading:
The OS provider has to collect the age information from the user
The OS provider has to make the age information available to any app that asks for it
The developer of any app has to request the age information from either the OS or from an Application Store
There is nothing about how the Application Store obtains the age information (presumably they mean something like Google Play or the App Store that already have the information about users and of course haven't considered anything else), and there is nothing about the OS sending the age anywhere other than an app running on it that asks for it.
And Facebook Messenger and Gmail Chat (or whatever it was called)! There was a glorious period of time where you could talk to pretty much anyone on any service from one chat app.
In this case she was drunk, and clearly regretted what she did so much she turned herself in even though she could get away with it if she just didn't.
So I don't believe she looked for a position of power in order to be able to do it.
No he wasn't. Although there was a clickbait article recently that implied it in the title, while in the actual article just saying that in theory it's possible it could happen.
Even with ChatGPT, when I wanted to play around with it, it was always free. I was never asked to pay for anything and never saw a reason to seek out a way to pay for it.
A friend asks you: hey, my Windows 7 laptop is getting old, the new ones are all on Windows 10, would you recommend it? Or should I consider a MacBook instead? I really like that Mac has virtual desktops, which my laptop didn't have.
This is the situation they are asking about. Are you answering:
"Actually Windows 10 has virtual desktops, so if that was the only reason for you to learn a new environment and move to Mac, then it might be simpler to choose Windows 10".
or
"Nah, they put a lot of spyware in Windows 10, pick something else".
WebP is super useful. I developed an offline hiking map app and it contained 900MB of PNG map tiles. Way too huge for a mobile app. I converted them to WebP and now they take 50MB while looking the same. It's amazing.
Of course they can, and I underline that in my comment several times, that this person is free to do it, good for them. I don't disagree with that at all. I'm sure they will learn a lot and that's great.
And everyone else is free to evaluate the prospects and realities of that fork.