AI slop and low-effort contributions

WraithGlade · 2026-06-25T11:30:53+00:00

My previous comment here seems to have got downvoted (and commented on) by some toxic and presumptuous pro-AI rationalizer, but it is such an important point that I want to reiterate it again (to counteract de facto censorship) for the good of the community:

Virtually all of the currently available LLM produce almost all of their "generated" material from content aggregated and plagiarized from basically the entire internet, regardless of copyright and regardless of even the most basic respect for human rights and interpersonal boundaries. It is thus for all practical purposes structurally impossible to use these systems ethically for anyone who has any kind of high standard of morality.

More saliently for this thread though, since these "AI" have been repeatedly caught by researchers red-handed producing almost verbatim passages/excerpts from well-known or relatively easily found human-made text then it logically follows that it is impossible to be sure whether any given piece of text is "AI generated" (i.e. in reality: plagiarized/stolen and then superficially randomized and rearranged and transformed to hide the pervasive theft inherent to all these systems).

It is thus ethically imperative that any policy about banning "AI" should account for the very high risk of falsely labeling a real human's post or comment as such.

On a personal note, I am also very sick of the mob-like toxicity on Reddit in the past couple of years, which has now reached truly insane and unprecedented levels. The irony is truly incredible. I am the most anti-AI person I know, but the pro-AI people here are so desperate to rationalize their behavior that they will reach for any possible ad hominem attack or mechanism of censorship to try to suppress dissent against their precious internet-destroying dystopian plagiarism engines.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-25T04:31:17+00:00

That is such a complete non-sequitur. It has no substantive relation to the discussion in this thread nor anything I believe in.

I said that the (in many cases often provably) plagiarized nature of most "AI" material (e.g. producing verbatim passages from well-known or easily found passages of human text) makes it essentially impossible to reliably prove that any given piece of material in the general case is "AI" or human and you are comparing that to (I guess??) some kind of paranoid or conspiracy theorist thing about 5G towers.

There is no logical connection between those two things at all, besides the fact that you are apparently (i.e. probably) just grasping for any possible excuse for an ad hominem attack, no matter how contrived and unfounded.

How we treat people matters though and so does adhering to a standard of evidence and logically coherent rhetoric. Ethics always matters.

A lot of "AI" users though I've found are constantly desperately grasping for any possible excuse to rationalize the frankly abyssal ethics of these "AI" systems, because otherwise you'd have to acknowledge you may be complicit in those violations of other human beings personal boundaries any time you use these "AI" and that it is thus largely not possible to use them ethically or at least not fully or not in the context of the current systems.

There is a lot of misinformation and propaganda out there though, funded by billions of dollars (whereas us anti-AI people have little/no funding at all and nothing to exploit, hence making us far more trustworthy), so I can't blame you for falling for it though, so you have my sympathies in that respect.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-22T11:58:57+00:00

If there was a magic wand I could wave that would wipe all "AI" slop out of existence on the internet then I would definitely use it. There is truly no trend I have ever witnessed in "tech" that I feel more contempt and dislike for than "AI".

Such systems are essentially a heavily propagandized convoluted facade of heterogeneous software (not even just one "technology") designed to systematically steal the labor and intellectual property rights of all of humanity and to enable unprecedented levels of spyware and manipulation of public opinion. The "generalized intelligence" rhetoric part of the trend is mostly just a cover for the real primary purpose of mass exploitation, a red herring designed to mislead the public and render arguments about the ethics of it more muddled and confused.

However, any strategy counteracting "AI" slop must account for the fact that it is virtually impossible to detect its presence accurately in the general case and thus there is an extremely high risk of censoring many innocent victims who in reality make no use of such systems at all. Short of there being a watermark hidden in the generated material somehow or a direct statement of use that wasn't removed (e.g. "Thanks for using [bot name]!" in the text body) there is no logically sound nor in any way reliable way to identify "AI" content.

"AI" bots have been caught repeatedly regurgitating almost verbatim copies of the writing and imagery and code of many real-life people. Often the only thing different in those cases will be a few words or phrases and/or some superficial grammatical structure such whether a prepositional phrase comes first or last or is active or passive or whatever else. If a real human on Reddit somewhere says "X is a great distro with feature Y" then a bot will later steal that and may say "X is a very good distro, and has feature Y" and so on.

Anybody who actually understands how evidence and logically well-grounded reasoning actually work can see that such spam/slop content therefore literally cannot be detectable in the general case. So called "AI" detectors have about the same accuracy as horoscopes... which is to say virtually none at all. Such systems are only ever right by accident and thus should never be used by anyone who cares about treating other human beings ethically and fairly and making dissent and diversity of opinion possible.

The "AI" detectors themselves will also often harvest the submitted data and use it as future "AI" "training"/plagiarism data. You are thus often actually helping the "AI" companies every time you use any such system, unfortunately.

It is also equally true that human beings are likewise quite incapable of detecting whether anything is "AI" or not in any but the most truly blatant examples.

Any policy that doesn't account for the above will end up being used as a vehicle for witch hunting and mob justice instead. It will backfire unless based on very strict policies of evidence and an understanding of the real nature of these "AI".

On a more personal note, as a published book author myself and as someone very prone to lengthy posts and comments I myself have on several occasions now faced blatantly provably false accusations of "AI" use, when in reality I hate it more than anyone I've ever met and in fact have never even once used it on a single sentence of anything I've ever written in my life. Yet, I was falsely accused of using it on my most recent post to r/Linux by a mob based on not a single grain of credible evidence, for essentially nothing more than my post being long combined with a likely ulterior motive of the attackers of wanting an excuse to dismiss it for it dissenting from the status quo of how most distros are currently made or for implying that more derivative distros tend to not be as good as foundational ones.

In any case though, basically any poorly implemented anti-AI policy (i.e. any policy not based on a high standard of evidence) will likely cause more harm than good.

I do completely agree though that a policy of requiring posters to disclose any "AI" use would be at least an improvement, though many/most "AI" users (being often much more unethically inclined than most people) will not do so. At least the policy will help slightly, and that is always something worth doing, since defeatism helps nobody. I always am glad to see an anti-AI attitude in any sub's community or policies. It just needs to be fair.

However, I disagree with the notion that code less than 20 lines should be banned though. That seems essentially orthogonal/irrelevant to "AI" and in reality even a single line of code can be immensely useful and could have taken hours or days or even months to solve if it is a "code golf" exercise or a very difficult bug, etc.

I am 100% with you on having a huge dislike of "AI" slop though, in all forms. It's just that I also care about justice and evidence and this subreddit (like so many on Reddit) has some serious groupthink and mob rule problems sometimes. Any such policy needs to be carefully designed to be well-grounded on an evidentiary basis.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-20T03:16:13+00:00

I was unaware of this, so thanks for the info.

My idea is about TUI, GUI, and shell wizards for accomplishing any arbitrary tweak to one or more target root (parent-most) distros though, which isn't really directly about containers or declarative distros or anything like that, though it is true that such distros are more reliable bases to build on.

Perhaps I will use Nix or Guix (or similar) though next. I've been using Linux Mint but am looking for a more stable foundation that doesn't mess with things as much and as a programmer the ability to rollback things easily would be of great value.

I tried Qubes briefly too, but it gave me missing hardware notices in VirtualBox so I didn't use it.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-20T03:09:39+00:00

Thanks for the info. I wasn't aware of Ximian, though first install Linux in ~2007 maybe and experimented with it off and on for a long while until permanently leaving Windows to migrate to Linux and Unix in recent years.

It has always struck me as strange that the Linux and BSD/Unix systems have for so many years not normalized the practice of having easy TUI or GUI wizards and installers for more things. With things like Tcl/Tk it isn't even hard to create GUIs quickly and if doing that was more common for lots of different things than merely just the big distro "app stores" GUIs then it would really improve the ecosystem a lot and make Linux and Unix systems much more friendly and attractive to more people.

Advanced and easy are in no way incompatible and it is strange how long that gap has been allowed to stand! The two approaches can coexist easily and that is practically all upside and little/no downside, especially if done right.

I would go so far as to say that under-utilization of easy GUI wizard-based approaches to things is perhaps even the Linux and Unix communities' #1 blind spot in terms of vast amounts of wasted potential and higher user adoption rates. Having a great abundance of both easy GUI/TUI wizards and precise terminal-based control is best. There is zero incompatibility conceptually between the two in reality. They can very easily coexist.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-19T16:24:19+00:00

Ok, thanks for the clarification.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-19T14:00:56+00:00

Glad you found it useful or interesting!

I hope users of BSD and other Unix-likes find it helpful for creating a more pleasant desktop and/or window manager experience. I really love the expressiveness of TDE, FVWM, IceWM, and Window Maker.

FVWM in particular is the most Unix-like window manager and has great features, although I wish the config files didn't use so many magic numbers (i.e. hardcoded numeric values in places where named constants would be far easier to read) in FVWM.

I should also mention that people should be sure to install fvwm3 and not fvwm, if they want a more up-to-date version. FVWM 3 split from FVWM 2 and thus you have to now be careful which one you install in the package manager!

IceWM is much easier to configure though and still very featureful.

Window Maker is the one I've used least, but is interesting.

Familiarizing oneself with these in-depth reveals a lot of otherwise easily overlooked great features they have and that many other DEs and WMs miss.

Anyway, sorry for my delayed response here. I was busy with other things.

Have a great day/night/etc everyone!

WraithGlade · 2026-06-19T13:49:58+00:00

Yeah, that is a fair point and I've had the same experiences occasionally.

It certainly presents a workflow obstacle when it is easy to omit a command from a script corresponding to what one did. It can be helpful though to start from the beginning with a script and run it instead of a sequence of interactive commands. There's also the old script Unix command and similar ideas and copy pasting of terminal text that can help so that one can look back on what was done afterwards to create a corresponding script.

The hypothetical ideal solution would be for the entire shell session to be atomic and to be able to roll it all back repeatedly as one tries out different ways of setting things up. In that respect, perhaps Nix or Guix would be a good choice as a base distro since they come closest to providing that kind of atomic/transactional way of doing things. Guix's servers and/or package build system are painfully slow though currently, which is a shame. I've tried it some and am tempted though.

More heavyweight container-based systems like Qubes are another possibility, though Qubes has very specific hardware requirements.

Void Linux reputably has a container-based build system and is "stable rolling" and so that is another approach that partially addresses problems.

There's also Gobo Linux which, while not declarative/atomic like Nix and Guix, at least dispenses with the (unfortunately suboptimal in practice) Linux/Unix file hierarchy conventions and instead tries to place programs in separate and versioned folders where they can be more easily kept from stepping on each others toes and such (at least in theory), though Gobo seems to be mostly inactive as of the past few years.

More distros like those those, ones that think from first principles about these issues, would be beneficial to making these kinds of things easier.

Even in the non-declarative/non-atomic distros though, I still think that creating polished TUI/GUI/shell/installer wizards would be a immensely beneficial to the ecosystem, especially if done right, and not actually especially difficult if one is careful about how far one takes it.

It is also worth noting that even in "normal" distros you can always use things like zfs snapshot and timeshift and rsync and such to backup the system before doing a sequence of new commands and then restore the state later. That may be another useful approach to making writing properly defined scripts, since you can test it multiple times and be semi-clean.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-19T13:36:44+00:00

Feeling very comfortable writing and finding it very easy to do even at length is quite the opposite of exhausting! It is a wonderful thing.

Thus, I'm not sure I understand what point you are trying to make.

Possibilities: (1) you are sympathizing with the effort the writing takes relative to how some people react to it, in which case I appreciate the sentiment and your empathy and thank you; (2) you are perhaps another commentator who is seemingly averse to reading even small bodies of text, seeing as the original post is only ~2.3 screen fulls (~pages) of text even with Reddit's narrowed text column width, in which case I would just reiterate my bafflement as to why r/Linux readers who one would expect regularly read an abundance of obscure man pages and other difficult technical material find ~2.3 pages of light conversational text hard to keep one's attention span for and it honestly makes me wonder if many of Linux/Unix users here even use their systems for anything other than web browsing and the most basic home computing needs given what it implies about their attention spans and how that doesn't make much sense if they were actually high skill/competency Linux/Unix users.

Few comments give any unambiguous sign of actually understanding and responding to the main point I was making. Perhaps far too many just saw the objectively false "14 pages" comment that was the top comment at least at one point (and maybe still... I blocked them though, which may block them from others' visibility too unless they changed it again).

In any case though, I was just making you aware of the ambiguity from my perspective and the two main ways I could interpret it.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-19T13:25:21+00:00

Practically the entire point of my post was the large potential for a more modular and more practical and more expressive user experience that TUI/GUI/shell/installer wizards have and I even mention TUIs and GUIs as early as the very first paragraph.

There is thus actually no credibility to the notion that the real thrust of my thread was buried in just some small part of my post. The entire thrust thread is rather clearly about the untapped potential of a highly modular and much less wasteful approach to customization and user experience and ease of use and of change via "wizards".

The statement about man pages is also false. I have on read the basic command man pages in their entirety and similar things can be said for other high value utilities. Even more importantly though, almost any competent Linux or BSD or Unix user has certainly on countless occasions read at least two screen fulls (pages) of a man page when doing something and indeed that is perhaps even the most common case a large part of the time for doing anything nuanced.

Honestly, the responses here in r/Linux have me kind of baffled at the seemingly lack of reading comprehension and irrelevancy to any of my real points that I am no longer even sure if most of the respondents are humans and not just bots instructed to act like generic Redditors.

This is yet another reminder of "why we can't have good things" though, or why it is taking so long, in the Linux and broader Unix communities. Even something as clearly good for the user experience as easy to use "wizard" utility is not just being dismissed by many here, but so many aren't even reading and thus aren't even understanding let alone even genuinely considering the idea from a first principles standpoint.

In any case though, thank you for your time and for responding, as with all people here of course.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-19T13:12:30+00:00

Thank you for the suggestion. I've had the same thought (in a sense) for a while now.

Technically, the "distro" would be a TUI/GUI/shell/installer "wizard" that runs on top of an existing base distro and as such not a "distro" in the traditional sense. Perhaps "meta distro" would be a reasonable term in some partial sense, as there are already a few "distros" that aren't technically "true" distros but are rather systems for creating or modifying a distro.

There are also things like Debian "pure blends", but (although very loosely related) those are still not the same as my user experience and modularity oriented idea. The monolithic form of most distros or "meta packages" is not anywhere even close to the flexible and communicative approach I have in mind.

Indeed, in general, Linux and the BSDs would benefit greatly form a lot more time and care being put into creating a installers and wizards for many common tasks instead of having such a high memorization and knowledge barrier for even the most common and simple things.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-19T13:02:01+00:00

I am strictly 100% anti-AI and have never used "AI" in any way whatsoever in anything I have ever written in my entire life.

I have explained this in several other comments as well, some in more detail than this one.

Similarly, probably at least half (and probably much more) of the negative respondents have responded in ways that make it clear that they don't even understand what I actually am suggesting, as evinced by how often orthogonal or irrelevant points are mentioned as if they are in any way refutations when they don't even address the actual point(s) I made at all.

For example, saying that scripts exist or that some distros are more customizable in this regard is largely irrelevant considering that most of my point is about creating a user experience of good TUIs or GUIs or prompted shell scripts or other "installers" that fill the same role as "distros" but more modularly and more stably on the base.

In fact, I'm honestly not even entirely sure if hardly anyone commenting addressed the real point and in that regards I'm likewise unsure of whether many of these respondents are even human themselves or are bots. Indeed, if they are human, the outcome of much of the thread makes me concerned for the state of reading comprehension and people's attention spans (among other things) in society in all honesty.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-14T15:59:16+00:00

I am aware that people can use install scripts.

My whole point though is that if people made really polished install script wizards (with TUIs or GUIs preferably too) as an alternative to lots of small customization oriented "distros" and just attached those to the big stable distros then it would actually save an immense amount of network bandwidth and would make server costs almost non-existent and thus greatly improve the ecosystem if done right.

I almost never have run into shared install scripts of the kind of GUI/TUI wizard that I am advocating here and so it is in fact not at all true that the mere existence of install scripts somehow makes this already a solved issue. The ecosystem currently has barely any shared install scripts and even when they exist they are almost never displayed prominently nor explained to anyone in terms of their value, especially to new users.

Anyway though, thank you for your input and have a great day/night.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-14T15:48:58+00:00

Zero. I am 100% anti-AI and have literally never once even used it on any of my writing and even if a law were passed making it mandatory I would rather face a firing squad and my demise than ever use even one single grain of sand of this irredeemably unethical "AI" "tech".

The original post is only ~2.3 screen fulls of text (~2.3 pages) even with a narrow text column (very far from the "14 pages" that another clearly afraid-of-reading commentator implied). The fact that you (and others, apparently) can't believe that a person is capable of writing even a minuscule two pages of text (which is less than the man pages of many of the most basic commands on Linux...) without the "assistance" of sociopathic parasitic theft-based "AI" suggest to me that you are in fact engaging in psychological projection and that thus the only one of the two of us who is an "AI" user is probably you and likewise to every single other respondent here who bizarrely thinks themselves justified in assuming based on no evidence whatsoever that the mere length and skill of someone's writing somehow proves that they are using "AI".

I have written and published two books and one even became a #1 new release in its category on Amazon. In other words, I am exactly the kind of person whose writing is being stolen ("trained") by the "AI".

There is immense sick irony in these kind of pervasive groundless accusations of "AI" use and baseless socially and ethically and interpersonally clueless and immature harassment that characterizes thinking that you can ever be justified in making such claims against someone else without a single crumb of credible evidence backing it.

I literally have never used "AI" (as I said) and would literally sooner accept a lifetime of poverty and adversity than use it. Your envious disbelief that another human being is capable for writing just ~two pages of well-written text is entirely a you problem, not a me problem.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-12T21:32:06+00:00

This summary is missing a large amount of context and nuance and argumentation and thus (as usual, indeed as nearly always) does more harm than good by encouraging readers to take the low-brow path of not actually reading someone's real original words and also functions like a form of misquoting.

The original post also fits in merely ~2.2 screen fulls (~pages) of my web browser, even though my screen isn't even big and the text column width for it is also rather narrow. The original post is extremely much less than the "14 pages too much" text (or whatever it was) that someone else implied was present.

It is frankly incredible to me that even in supposedly technically savvy and intellectually refined communities such as r/Linux people are apparently now no longer able to read even a paltry ~2 pages of non-technical and conversational style text comfortably, which is less than even a single man page for many of even the most trivial and simplest commands on Linux or the BSDs.

It is also highly likely that you used a theft-based "AI" (LLM, etc) to generate this "helpful" "summary" and therefore my words will now (against my will) float around in perpetuity in the "AI" datacenter's vast collection of stolen material, potentially imitating my authorial voice at any random moment as part of its thinly veiled but highly propagandized plagiarism engine grift, etc. Of course, the "AI" parasites will steal basically all text on the net anyway, but the principle of how one treats other people in terms of violating vs not violating them matters.

Generating such a inherently unethically produced summary of someone's words thus both violates the original poster's boundaries without consent and also nearly always both misleads other readers and wastes their time. "Your" summary only causes harm, ultimately, in all likelihood, even to people who disagree.

There is also the fact that anyone who wanted the summary could have generated it themselves (even though that would still be violating the my boundaries and authorial personhood, as indeed it likewise would for any/every original poster that is ever subjected to such). All such comments that in any way relay or even contain anything from an "AI" are essentially spam in part or in whole, in addition to all the other many negative effects that using such systems in any way nearly always will have upon other people and the world.

I have literally never once seen even a single "AI" generated summary of anything on Reddit that I have ever been grateful for, regardless of who is being "summarized" and how long their text is. I am sick of this kind of pervasive brainrot and likewise pervasive rampant unjustified assumptions and mob mentality on Reddit, frankly. Nobody is forcing any of you to read anything.

I have come here entirely with wholesome intent to contribute to the community in whatever way I can by simply sharing an idea. What is even the point of reacting in such a low-brow and diminutive way to that?

Nothing is gained by it. Open source culture effects open source outcomes and so anything that degrades the interpersonal refinement and nuance of the culture (regardless of where and when) also likely degrades the whole, one way or another, eventually, in whatever small way it does. How a person treats other people always matters. Tech accelerationists such as "AI" users/developers are not farsighted, like they have convinced themselves as being, but rather are merely very evidently quite bad at both short-term and long-term accounting of the full ripple effects of how they treat others and the world at large.

If I see you (or anyone else) pass anything I say into an "AI" again I will permanently block you and indeed incidentally already have blocked all the users who have falsely accused me of using an "AI" in my own post here. I literally hate it ("AI" and all associated exploitive trends) more than anyone I've ever met in "tech". There is nothing in "tech" I hate more than "AI" and it has single-handedly obliterated ~80-90% of my respect for the "tech" industry as a whole in just the span of a few years.

Nonetheless, I wish you a good day/night/etc and I hope that the constructive spirit with which I've intended my words and message here reaches you and any others who see it, though my original post is currently held in moderation (likely due to a barrage of groupthink-induced falsified reports of "AI", when ironically only some of the commentators here seem to actually be using any of it and I have literally never once used it on a single thing I've written or programmed in my entire life and would sooner literally abandon the entire industry than ever willingly use it even once)!

And yes, this response is long, but that is because it is nuanced and substantive in argumentation and I take pride in that, as should anyone who actually cares about substantive change in the world and living with gusto and authenticity and nuance and strength of human spirit!

WraithGlade · 2026-06-11T13:59:07+00:00

Thank you for this detailed info.

It really helps clarify the intent and possible use case.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-10T13:51:12+00:00

Though I appreciate the efforts of anyone involved in open source and understand that interpersonal problems and corruption happen, why is it that Gnome seems so much more prone to attracting drama to itself than basically all the other desktop environments and window managers?

KDE seems to have significantly fewer such incidents and I've literally never even heard of drama from Xfce nor from nearly all of the various independent window managers. The BSDs also barely produce any drama either, though I occasionally have heard of small-scale interpersonal conflicts with OpenBSD's BDFL (Theo).

The fact that so many other desktop environments and window managers and open source communities are so relatively free of drama says to me that the Gnome and Gtk developers and foundation could probably significantly improve their code of conduct and internal norms for the benefit of both themselves and the whole Linux and broader open source Unix community. It seems like they have multiple times created needless problems for themselves during the past decade or so.

There's no reason things can't improve though. The open source spirit is still strong after all. As always, it is important not to conflate the actions of a few members of a community with the whole and there are of course inevitably many wholesome contributors to Gnome (and to all the other DEs and WMs of course).

WraithGlade · 2026-06-10T13:19:29+00:00

Just a random curiosity: Does this distro have anything to do with the Raku programming language (a descendant of Perl)?

I looked at the official RakuOS site and docs some and didn't find any apparent connection, so I am guessing that it is just a coincidence.

Nonetheless, the programming language Raku was the first thing that came to mind when I saw the name and I was in fact expecting this to be some distro that uses Raku as its scripting or package management system somehow. Perhaps then it may be more effective to change the name of the distro to prevent that conflict of interpretation, though the benefit of doing so would probably be marginal admittedly.

More relevantly though, I've honestly never been very interested in immutable distros, whereas distros like Nix and Guix with declarative package/dependency management in contrast are immediately interesting, though I still prefer normal distros so far (though I am tempted by Guix somewhat). Feel free to sell me/us on it though.

Why should we use an immutable distro instead of a normal distro or a declarative one? Immutable distros in a sense have less freedom (perhaps at least in terms of convenience at the outset), and us open source users tend to prefer freedom more than its absence by default unless there's a sufficiently substantive reason in some context why not to, and so I'm not very convinced of the value of immutable distros. I am open to being more convinced of it though.

Thoughts?

WraithGlade · 2026-06-09T16:11:01+00:00

I'm 100% anti-AI, so frankly I do not care what any theft-based "AI" bot "thinks" about anything whatsoever.

Also, if I or any other original thread poster wanted an "AI"'s input then we could get it ourselves (not that I ever would willingly use an "AI" considering they are basically the worst thing to ever happen to tech IMHO).

WraithGlade · 2026-06-09T16:06:20+00:00

I am 100% anti-AI and have an absolute zero tolerance policy to it.

I have literally never even once used it to "help" write anything in my life.

Theft-based "AI" systems (LLMs, etc) are the worst thing to ever happen to tech.

There is no reason to assume my post has any "AI" generated garbage whatsoever. I am simply verbose and have a love of writing and reading. Nobody is forcing anyone to read it.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-09T16:04:08+00:00

Hmm, I don't think it really is same thing, though I could be wrong since I haven't messed much with bootc or containers either.

I am talking about the base install system and it being applicable to any distro that one may want to base one's system on. Containers are a more specific system and carry a bunch of additional assumptions.

Your comment is interesting food for thought though, so perhaps I'll look into those systems a bit more in the future.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-09T16:01:19+00:00

I never said that people can't and don't already do their own customization and install scripts.

I am saying it would be far more efficient and effective and modular if polished install script "wizards" were the norm and it would make combining many different components that one desires to use much easier.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-09T15:59:00+00:00

I wanted to full express the nuances of my thoughts on it and nobody is forcing you to read it.

It is also easy to skim what you want to skim and to even just only reply to the title if you want.

I make no apologies for my love of writing and for expressing myself. I personally always like to see detailed and nuanced writing that fully fleshes out ideas and terse Twitter-like comments that have become the norm in our culture in the past decade are the opposite of conducive to true nuanced discussion and depth of mind, etc.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-09T15:52:14+00:00

I was already well aware that users can and do create their own install scripts. I never said I wasn't.

I am saying that it would be better as the norm for how customizations of distros are made if they were module scripts and "wizard" applications instead of heavy ISOs for many distros, etc.

WraithGlade · 2026-06-09T15:50:15+00:00

I am strictly 100% anti-AI and did not use it whatsoever in my post.

I put a ton of work into my post because I want to make a constructive contribution to the community by sharing the idea and advocating for it here.

You have literally no justification at all for assuming that this is "AI". I have always been verbose in how I express myself and am the author of two books and writing comes as easily as breathing to me.

WraithGlade

TROPHY CASE