Contrary to popular belief, AI's aren't seintient and they don't have agency. They are computer programs. They follow instructions. At the end of the day, its just a machine.

If you wrote something on a package that would trigger a machine to kill someone, that is called murder (or at least manslaughter depending on details)

> Just like those taint chips in clothing stores only screw with people who steal clothes.

If we are going to extend the metaphor to the physical, i'd point out that probably the most equivalent is putting a bomb in a package on your porch in order to target people who steal packages. Which is illegal pretty much everywhere.

Regardless, even if you are of the opinion that the maintainer of jqwik was wronged, just because someone wrongs you does not give you the right to wrong them in turn. There is a reason why we as a society developed a court system instead of just settling disputes by vengence.

Is it that they can't or don't want to. I'm sure curl is popular enough that it could attract a co-maintainer if it wanted to. Of course there is a cost to that. Software projects done effectively by a single person are often more focused and designed more coherently. I'm not sure curl would be as good a product if there were multiple maintainers with potentially conflicting visions.

If you ever really need anything fixed in the open source world, there is always the option of doing it yourself

It does sound right.

Obviously the world isn't black and white, and whether something is a backup depends on what threats you are backing up against. Backing up in case of disk failure looks different then if you want your backup to survive a nuclear war.

But ultimately yes, if you configure restic/borg to backup to a different directory on the same disk (and not even different access control), that is not a backup.

The author of this tool consented when he choose a license that allowed such things. If he wasn't ok with it he should have chosen a different license. Intentionally creating booby-traps is unacceptable in all circumstances.

The open source definition requires no discrimination against fields of endeavour.

If you place restrictions like this in the license it no longer meets the definition of open source.

You can obviously license things however you want, but you cant also claim its open source.

When it comes to responsibility, usually we consider a person intentionally doing something that they reasonably believe will have some consequence as responsible for that consequence. Especially when the primary reason they took the action was to generate the consequence. Excuces of the form "Technically i didn't do it, i just knowingly did something for the explicit purpose of triggering some downstream consequence" generally do not fly.

Contrary to popular belief, most users want those sorts of things or the things they enable.

It has nothing to do with git. Making a copy on a separate server would still be a backup even if you weren't using git. Using git without pushing your repo somewhere else would not be a backup.

This feels deeply unsatisfying to me, because the argument is not specific to conciousness so it doesn't tell us anything about conciousness.

Personally i suspect conciousness is kind of code for: the experience of being alive as a human. In which case aliens might not be concious by definition.

The argument essentially is. The universe is really big. It would be weird if we were the only thing alive in it, so probably there are other life forms out there. Given enough of them probably some are conscious and made out of different stuff then we are.

And sure, fair enough. That seems plausible. But it also seems like not a very interesting argument. It is essentially just saying the universe is big, therefore all the possibilities are out there.

Until someone cares enough to do it. This is open source software. When it comes to open source, the golden rule is you either do the things you care about yourself or stfu.

Given the libav fork wasn't all that long ago, it can obviously happen to ffmpeg just as much as it can happen to any other project.