Racism in one form or another is at the very core of the nation state. I disagree with the very notion that rights should be established with a razor that cuts by citizenship. It’s a blunt tool that might work to some degree but clearly the US shows that citizenship is an insufficient measurement to the positive contribution to GDP or entrepreneurship.

> It would also be more interesting if you can explain how you imagine we’d even get to a place where there is only a single earthly jurisdiction with free movement etc. now THAT would be an interesting thought experiment.

I don’t know the path to there. That does not mean I can’t see that as a goal worth perusing and to see things they take humanity further from that goal as a regression.

If you read my blog you should have seen plenty of content before to get an idea why my red lines are. I even have a separate blog on that entirely: dark.ronacher.eu. My line is not here.

Author here. Just because something is standard practice does not mean this should be a goal. I do not want to live in a world where the north star is dividing people based on their birthplace lottery. I might accept it as a temporary local maximum that countries are optimizing towards but that does not mean I have to subscribe to that as a general destination or even the most optimal one.

I can tell you that within the agentic coding community plenty of people are using it as a way to refer to coding agents by their users. That's a pretty neutral use.

> True, but I also think that "clanker" is fairly far towards one end of the spectrum, not really near the middle.

Until I saw the comments on the most recent hackernews discussion on it I would never have made that guess.

The issue we have with LLMs is that people are starting to treat their conversations with these things as a substitute to human interactions. Division very much is the point because they are not humans. There is a question to me about what the approach is but not being precise about their nature does not seem wise to me.

Dogs are not inanimate objects and even legally they carry a lot of rights. None of this should apply to an LLM.

> Well, no, not really. You can't use a word that sounds like a slur, and usually is meant to be a slur and complain that it's getting polluted.

What makes something into a slur is when people are perceiving it as such. So yes, it's the usage of the term that is what makes it that. Would clicker be a slur? Or slacker? Or hummer and dinger? Where is the line. I'm assuming the line emerges from what society does with a word.

> Then don't! There are degrees between "the agent decided" and "clanker"

But seemingly that is only something that emerges from the discourse. You seem to draw a line somewhere that is different from where I would have drawn it. Impossible to figure out a priori.

We’re so early in this technology phase, now is the time to tinker and explore. At one point that window will close.

It does not follow the template, it's made by a user who is also active in the openclaw repo and it's full of slop analysis.

My hunch is that this term is loaded not because it's seen as a slur, but because people are currently attempting to give LLMs a soul and they are developing a certain unease about some of the consequences that come with it. For some the LLM is developing from a soul-less tool to a something with a personality, something they bond with, that's where some of those lines are blurring. I just don't think this is healthy at all.

So no. I cannot stress enough how much I disagree with the idea that this is in any way related to the n-word precisely because this is addressed as non humans.

That we are seriously considering if these things should be in any ways be equated to humans to me is a problem. They are not. They cannot and must not be given rights or responsibilities. They are dumb tools and if we lose sight of that, we can go down really problematic paths.

I have even on the receiving side of agent psychosis for more than a year now (because people talk to the LLM and sometimes the LLM tells people to talk to me) and there is only darkness there.

The reason you don’t insult other humans should be obvious, but none of that translates to machines. From my perspective it’s a grave mistake that we’re even remotely entertaining the idea right now that LLMs are sentient.

From that perspective I really quite appreciate the term. That said, I can see that it really seems to trigger some folks. I’m not sure we have found the right language to refer to what we have.

A machine does not have feelings. If you call your power drill a piece of shit you are not overstepping any bounds either.

We’re naming a machine here, not a human being. Even if it was a slur (I don’t consider it one) it would be directed at a piece of equipment.

I find it fascinating because I don’t think people would bat an eye if that term was used for a hammer or keyboard. Yet somehow it changes when applied to an LLM based machinery. Craftspeople often apply jargon to their tools, much of which is neutral to negative.

> Not even half-way through this #curl release cycle we are already at 11 confirmed vulnerabilities - and there are three left in the queue to assess and new reports keep arriving at a pace of more than one/day.

> 11 CVEs announced in a single release is our record from 2016 after the first-ever security audit (by Cure 53).

> This is the most intense period in #curl that I can remember ever been through.

[1]: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7463481...

Since uv needs a singular resolution that's entirely intentional. In npm you can install diverging resolutions for different parts of the tree but that is not an option with Python. I had to make the same decision in Rye and there is just no better solution here.

If an upper bound were to be supplied you would end up with trees that can no longer resolve in practice. Some package ecosystems in Python even went as far as publishing overrides for old packages that got published with assumed upper bounds that ended up wrong.

Don't forget that you cannot know today if your package is going to be compatible or incompatible with a not yet released package.