Not sure I get the joke?

Agreed that land and water are smaller compared to agriculture, but the electricity usage change is significant. The LLM boom is unlike prior datacenter workloads. The electrical demand is far higher due to the more power hungry chips and running them at full utilization. It’s projected to go from 5% to 15% of all US electrical demand in quite a short amount of time

This is delaying the closures of fossil fuel plants (here’s an example of 15 coal plants in the US last year), and starting to rely more heavily on generators to install capacity faster despite solar/wind being far cheaper

I have worked on open source projects. I cannot fork sheer number of projects going towards LLMs alone. This is a losing proposition. Open source is not an individualistic action. This is a collective action, and we need developers of open source to live the values of open source

someone else can pick up from here

A big point of my comment earlier was that making a project increasingly LLM generated makes it harder for someone to pick up as quickly. A huge amount of complexity can be added insanely fast. In this rsync example, the entire testing system was changed overnight (while generating issues in the process). The projects become harder to work on in general

EDIT: also to add, this still has the issues of not knowing where the un-copyleftable code lies and/or having to rework large portions of the project are if you want to keep that

deleted by creator

That framing is missing a lot. Open source software is way more than about using the code. For me, it is not the bugs and quality that concern me most about things like this (though I do have concerns with that too). It’s about the broader issues with LLMs in terms of cooperate power, environmental impact, etc. Calling it out is less about any one project and more about stopping the whole open source ecosystem from spiraling into an LLM-dependent mess. LLMs themselves can easily become the death of FOSS in a broader sense

LLMs flip the power dynamics of development on their head. For starters, the outputs are likely no longer copyrightable in many jurisdictions, which undermines copyleft licenses (rsync is under GPL for example).

The kind of code that LLMs generate also tend to add complexity rather fast where it becomes more and more difficult for any human to understand it. Becoming dependent on LLMs makes development more of a question of computing power rather than effort. Companies will be able to spend more than you. FOSS will not be able to compete nearly as well. It’s also an inherent dependency on big tech companies who will be happy to exploit that the second they can or cut you off it you start to hit their bottom line. Software cannot be free in terms of freedom if modifying it in a reasonable amount of time starts to almost require a tool controlled by someone else

Using “Open Source” (which has somehow become “public weights” to most) / local LLMs are hardly freedom from this either given that they will always be behind given the massive financial costs to make models, unlike traditional software. If you find any advantage or way to reduce resource usage to make a better model, the bigger tech companies will just quickly scale that up far bigger than you can and meet or exceed what you have. It still just as well makes your ability to modify software dependent on the hardware you have. How free is open source software if it becomes increasingly difficult to modify without an expensive GPU?

No other way to review long patches besides LGTM says only profession that keeps doing that

Almost all of the latest commits on the project now :/

https://github.com/RsyncProject/rsync/commits/master/

There are also a number of companies doing culture meat for cats. Cats very much can eat more than just animal products, so using other ingredients for some portion of it would not be an issue

So if i created my own keyboard from scratch on a open hardware microcontroller, could i implement this?

The USB controller that interrupts the CPU lives on the other side of the connection, so you’d just be building hardware that responses to the polling. If you’re curious what that looks like, Ben Eater has a cool video looking at what that looks like for a USB 2 keyboard https://youtu.be/wdgULBpRoXk

There’s also the case of Bluetooth dongle keyboards not working in UEFI (except that one) but USB always do. Is it this or just the UEFI not having drivers?

I am no USB Keyboard expert, but through the power of looking it up it seems like most of these do not operate as a HID (human interface device, like mouse and keyboard) so need driver support, but some start up with a basic HID proxy which might be you have one that works. From an older thread about BIOSes rather than UEIFs

A keyboard using Bluetooth cannot access the BIOS. Logitech Bluetooth keyboards get around this by having a dongle that pairs with the keyboard in a more basic, non-Bluetooth mode until the driver kicks in and switches modes. Microsoft might be similar mode with their keyboards and dongles, but I cannot confirm that.

https://superuser.com/questions/242457/use-a-bluetooth-keyboard-to-access-edit-the-bios

Technically, interrupts are still often involved… just from the USB controller on the state of the polling instead of the keyboard directly on a keypress

Some keyboards implement the USB Boot Keyboard profile specified in the USB Device Class Definition for Human Interface Devices (HID) v1.11 and are explicitly configured to use the boot protocol. These are limited to 6-key rollover (6KRO) and will interrupt the CPU every time the keyboard is polled (even if there is no state change) unless the USB controller is programmed to tell the keyboard to respond with negative acknowledgments, which the USB controller discards in hardware without interrupting the CPU, when there are no state changes to report

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_human_interface_device_class#Keyboards

Any economic system is going to face enormous pressure with the mass demand not being addressed, capitalistic or not. The demand side of the equation is going to be changed if you want to avoid an uprising. We’re not talking about some small level of reduction in production

For instance, if you wanted to move to a grass-fed only beef production, you could only supply at most around a quarter of all current beef production while using 100% of grassland (which would create deforestation pressure). This is while simultaneously increasing methane emissions and number of cattle slaughtered. If you want to avoid a methane emission increase, you’d need to go far lower production

We model a nationwide transition [in the US] from grain- to grass-finishing systems using demographics of present-day beef cattle. In order to produce the same quantity of beef as the present-day system, we find that a nationwide shift to exclusively grass-fed beef would require increasing the national cattle herd from 77 to 100 million cattle, an increase of 30%. We also find that the current pastureland grass resource can support only 27% of the current beef supply (27 million cattle), an amount 30% smaller than prior estimates

Taken together, an exclusively grass-fed beef cattle herd would raise the United States’ total methane emissions by approximately 8%.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aad401/pdf

As long as animal agriculture exists in any scale it’s the invariable outcome. As long as there’s mass demand, there will continue to be mass production

Starting this off with: I am not an epidemiologist and most of the epidemiologist I’m seeing online aren’t yet too concerned

That being said, they have not found any rodents on the ship, though that does not mean they didn’t just miss them in their search. The version on the ship has been confirmed to be the Andes Virus (ANDV) which is human-to-human transmissible in a way that most hantavirus are not

It’s hard to say exactly how the virus will behave outside of a cruise ship (which are known for spreading diseases more than other locations), but we can potentially look at a past outbreak in 2018 in a small town for an idea

In this work, we described the isolation of the strain responsible for the largest ANDV PTP transmission outbreak, which occurred in the small town of Epuyén and began on November 2, 2018. This strain, ARG-Epuyén, exhibited a high capacity for PTP transmission, necessitating the implementation of quarantine measures to curtail further spread [8]. The median reproductive number (the mean number of secondary cases caused by an infected person) was 2.12 before control measures were implemented and subsequently dropped to below 1.0 by late January

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12201636/

Possibly, but this all reads to me more as a pivot. If it’s controlled opposition they’re after, they’re taking a very long term look at it since they started expanding plant-based meat things they do in 2017. They also more prominently tout in on their website than a side mention. From their website:

Maple Leaf Foods is a leading Canadian consumer protein company, making high-quality, innovative and differentiated fresh, prepared and plant protein products

This is also coinciding at a time that they spun off their pork production into a separate company and shuffling things around. They’re also talking (publicly at least) to investors like they very much believe in plant-based meats as the future instead of just a hedge

In the longer term though, it also gives said company an easier way to pivot besides doubling down on meat production. I’d rather meat production companies try to pivot away early than fight to the bitter end. It’d make the fight a lot easier if they don’t see animal rights as an existential threat to their company and instead more of a “guess we gotta change our lineups”

(This is assuming that they are genuinely doing this as a pivot)

The point is to stop the demand for animal products and plant-based meats and such very much help towards that goal. Many people do like things like this, including many who end up going vegan, in part, because of them. Arguing against them is counter productive

There are also vegan pre-made meals you can buy which don’t use plant-based meats (mostly in the form of frozen or canned meals). Those are also helpful. We can and should encourage both

Do you still get to have onions and spices and all that when you make PVP tacos? Or do you lose those from other players taking them from you?

Almost all global meat production happens in factory farms. Especially in developed countries with the highest meat consumption. I will look at the US for an example:

Currently, ‘grass-finished’ beef accounts for less than 1% of the current US supply

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aad401

We estimate that 99% of US farmed animals are living in factory farms at present. By species, we estimate that 70.4% of cows, 98.3% of pigs, 99.8% of turkeys, 98.2% of chickens raised for eggs, and over 99.9% of chickens raised for meat are living in factory farms. Based on the confinement and living conditions of farmed fish, we estimate that virtually all US fish farms are suitably described as factory farms, though there is limited data on fish farm conditions and no standardized definition.[1] Land animal figures use data from the USDA Census of Agriculture[2] and EPA definitions of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations.[3]

https://www.sentienceinstitute.org/us-factory-farming-estimates

Even if those other methods could magically do much better, which I significantly doubt given the history of those kinds of methods over promising and under delivering, it does relatively little good to look at any other method because they do not come close to scaling to the level of consumption we’re seeing here. A pasture only system could at most come to a small fraction of production. Using 100% of the land, which would create huge deforestation pressures

We model a nationwide transition [in the US] from grain- to grass-finishing systems using demographics of present-day beef cattle. In order to produce the same quantity of beef as the present-day system, we find that a nationwide shift to exclusively grass-fed beef would require increasing the national cattle herd from 77 to 100 million cattle, an increase of 30%. We also find that the current pastureland grass resource can support only 27% of the current beef supply (27 million cattle), an amount 30% smaller than prior estimates

[…]

If beef consumption is not reduced and is instead satisfied by greater imports of grass-fed beef, a switch to purely grass-fed systems would likely result in higher environmental costs, including higher overall methane emissions. Thus, only reductions in beef consumption can guarantee reductions in the environmental impact of US food systems.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aad401

EDIT: It’s also worth noting that a lot of people that start on things like beyond and impossible end up eventually switching to much more whole plant-based foods in the end anyways. It allow a lot more easy room to bridge to whole foods than starting with just 100% whole food is for a lot of people

The process around meat is no less industrial either. Whole food plant-based diets come out ahead health wise of course, but the research comparing animal meats to beyond show beyond coming out ahead for health

In terms of environmental effects, processing is not a major factor at all. It’s hardly a minor one either

For most foods — and particularly the largest emitters — most GHG emissions result from land use change (shown in green) and from processes at the farm stage (brown). Farm-stage emissions include processes such as the application of fertilizers — both organic (“manure management”) and synthetic; and enteric fermentation (the production of methane in the stomachs of cattle). Combined, land use and farm-stage emissions account for more than 80% of the footprint for most foods.

[…]

Not just transport, but all processes in the supply chain after the food left the farm – processing, transport, retail and packaging – mostly account for a small share of emissions.

https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local

TVP is rather cheap type of soy* because it’s what leftover from soybean oil extraction. It’s pretty protein dense because of that so recipes like this add moisture to it to help make it a little softer. It’s very yummy when seasoned well!

* TVP itself technically stands for textured vegetable protein, but it’s 99.9% of the time always soy unless specified otherwise (it technically can be made from other plants)