It relies on a legitimate government outside of it to provide actual protection from outside lawlessness.

An solarpunk society would decentralize power as much as possible in-line with Anarchist principles. Anarchist Catalonia (which had over 3.5 million participants) demonstrated that a decentralized society is entirely viable, and how it functioned was documented quite well (such as in this book). We also have a modern example of how Rojava (a somewhat decentralized society in Syria of 4.6 million people) does community defense.

That’s exactly the type of thing I had in mind! Thanks for the heads up :D

Dome Keeper is a really fun up-to 4-player co-op game about digging for minerals beneath a dome and defending it from creatures on the surface who try to break in every so often.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/1637320/Dome_Keeper/

It’s mostly a chill game, but the defense of the dome can be exciting, though only one player needs to actually man the defenses, the rest can continue to mine below ground.

I saw a couple standout titles like A Short Hike (polished cozy game) and Neon Struct (thief-like). I’ll see if there’s anything else that jumps out at me.

Edit: Eldritch is a rather good rogue-like Cthulhu FPS

Dungeon Bodega Simulator looks fun.

Deep Space Exploitation looks good.

Hyper Gunsport looks like a fun multiplayer game.

The Wratch’s Den looks neat.

Cyberpunk depicts a dystopia that assumes capitalism essentially ‘won’, but how punks at the bottom of society can still resist it and use the system’s technology against itself.

Solarpunk instead depicts a future where capitalism lost to the punks, and how society would be organized from that anti-authoritarian eco-anarchist perspective.

Ah man, that absolutely sucks. I went and read all of their responses. You did a fantastic job presenting a compelling case to them, but for the most part they seemed to not want to engage with the meat of your points, or acknowledge your distinction between code output and AI bug searching. And odd of one to equate AI code as equivalent to code coming to them in a dream, yet never address the copyright angle. Thanks for taking the time to engage with them to find all that out.

I’m starting to see that avoiding slop even in the FLOSS world isn’t going to be trivial, and more are jumping on board than I anticipated… I’m thinking it may be necessary and worthwhile to probe as many widely used FLOSS projects as possible on their stance to then compile the results into a list on codeberg (so others can contribute their findings as well), to make it easier for people to find software that refuses to use AI.

Maybe calling it the Slopless Software Project?

Gloomwood is the only close spiritual successor, but its been in early access for a long time (though it does still get substantial updates).

Honestly, as a silver lining, this is likely to finally make studios pull back from graphics being the end all be all, and instead focus a bit more on art styles that run well on weaker hardware.

The endless pursuit of graphics has had drastically diminishing returns since the PS3, it’s about time the industry focused on optimization and doing more with less for once.

It’ll let our hardware stay relevant, and it’s better for the environment if we make it last as long as possible anyway :)

Down with consumption, and bring on the age of Permacomputing, I say!

This comment in a different thread from someone who used to work for them gives some great background as to why.

The other day I tried installing Star Wars Dark Forces 2 from disk, complete with a ‘windows 95/98 compatible’ blurb on it. Heroic launcher got the installer running without issue and within a few minutes it was playing.

I ended up using the Openjkdf2 engine instead for some nice quality of life improvements, but it was still quite something to see Linux run a piece of software from 1997 so effortlessly.

It is very unfortunate there wasn’t more standardization around compositors between all the major desktop environments, that part of it does suck.

This is a direct quote from the linked blog:

Occasionally I’ll have it write more substantial code for me, usually for bug fixes, and occasionally for small features. I find it does a pretty decent job here, but I keep it on manual mode and often ask it to write the code in a different way, or take a different approach.

He is generating code and using it directly. AFAIK, being on manual mode in Claude just means approving or rejecting the each step of generated code, but it is generated and the dev appears to be using that generated code, which is introducing the risk of unknowingly using and shipping non-open source copyrighted code that the LLM trained on.

Whether he’s doing it blindy or paying close attention, or telling the AI to re-write it or code it in a different way, does not minimize the copyright infringement risk of the output of the code that is used. Only rewriting the output by hand would minimize that risk.

Manual mode just means he’s approving, rejecting, or asking it to do something different for each step, but the output is still ultimately from the LLM.

But he is still generating decent amounts of code with it as well, as he states:

Occasionally I’ll have it write more substantial code for me, usually for bug fixes, and occasionally for small features.

Generating that code is injecting copyright risk into the compositor.

I haven’t heard of it happening and until it does it’s basically a non issue.

Projects that operate on that assumption are essentially sticking their head in the sand and hoping for the best. LLM output is on particularly shaky ground regarding copyright and it’s vulnerability to being sued for plagiarism, see here: https://slrpnk.net/comment/23533549

I think it’s a particularly dangerous gamble for projects based in the US, where the court system is extremely pro-corporation, making it likely to be much harder for a small FLOSS project to defend itself successfully.

Using the internet in any capacity directly helps the financi situations of the big tech companies

If someone gets their internet in the US, it is likely supplying a mega corporation with a monthly revenue stream, as internet providers are an oligopoly here. In other countries, this is often not the case.

Internet access in the modern day is, for the most part, extremely difficult to avoid needing in order to function easily in society.

In comparison, Corporate LLMs are extremely easy to avoid, and all of society got along fine without it just a few short years ago.

Is it not worthwhile to lower your fossil fuel use where possible, despite many in the US needing a car due to terrible public transport? Is it not also worth lowering animal meat consumption where possible for both animal welfare concerns and environmental concerns? I think there’s equal merit in depriving as much capital (and thus power) from pro-fascist tech corporations as possible, even if it is not total.

I agree, that would be good to know.

The problem is both using LLM code in an open-source project due to the threat that poses to the project if they unknowingly introduce copyright infringement, as as well as the very real ethical concerns inherent to using corporate owned and hosted LLM models.

LXQt and MATE are the most comparable alternatives. Neither have commented on AI contributions (either for or against), AFAIK.

Using big tech corporate AI in any capacity is a bad idea.

Using a self hosted model to check for bugs (as long as you have the skills to know when the bugs it detects are not hallucinated) is probably okay. I personally would not recommend letting any LLM do the actual coding for you, however.