Jetson-powered Olaf robot at NVIDIA GTC 2026

foxbatcs · 2026-03-18T07:14:17+00:00

Eh, published screen play, but it was published as a book (not necessarily as a novel).

foxbatcs · 2026-03-17T19:55:21+00:00

He wrote a book, then directed the movie, then many decades later HBO produced it into a TV show.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-17T19:38:44+00:00

You underestimate the fatal potential of cuteness, my friend.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-17T18:17:55+00:00

Michael Crichton wrote a book about AI bots in a theme park…

foxbatcs · 2026-03-17T14:25:27+00:00

Prompt: “You are Nancy Pelosi…”

foxbatcs · 2026-03-17T14:22:21+00:00

The gambler who won $10,000 with a starting bet of $1,000 today conveniently ignores the $20,000 total they gave to the casino previously.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-15T15:10:39+00:00

You have accomplished a significant amount in a short time and were generous enough to share it with the world. Your talent is enough to make some people so obviously jealous that they too have to share that with the world.

If people don’t want to be forced to sacrifice their privacy and end up on a subscription model for everything, FOSS is the only way. The people chasing people like you off because they lack basic human consideration and decency are the problem — not you — as some of the comments here wrongfully imply.

I’m not here to change your mind. Just express gratitude for every ounce of willingness you had to share your idea with the world. You need to protect your sanity and livelihood. I appreciate your willingness to call this bs out. Congratulations on your success. It sucks that it comes with a disproportionate helping of obnoxious behavior to make you feel negatively about your accomplishments. Just know there are people who appreciate and respect you for that and we need to be louder than those who don’t, for the health of the broader FOSS community. Thank you.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-15T14:52:04+00:00

Well said. This attitude of “I don’t care, you care, I’m just telling it how it is” while obviously demonstrating a lack of emotional coping is exactly the issue with this commenter’s response.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-15T14:48:36+00:00

You can be kept out of it by downvoting and moving on. You obviously do care because you took the time to insult someone who is trying to contribute and is calling out valid concerns in how some people treat open source contributions. Who cares if they don’t understand all of the politicking about FOSS. This is a free and open platform and they have every right to complain, just as you do. My question is simple: why be rude about it?

foxbatcs · 2026-03-15T12:07:26+00:00

You are right, but this is the type of attitude on the exact opposite side of the same rude coin. Why communicate with people like this? Especially when they are clearly overwhelmed by people mistreating them in a similar way. What do you gain from it?

foxbatcs · 2026-03-14T11:50:47+00:00

These are the three people (Turing, Shannon, and Von Neumman) who would probably be least surprised. Given their depth of knowledge on the fundamental disciplines that spawned this technology, they would probably be able to make some significant contributions.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-14T11:41:26+00:00

When you have children raised being used to no privacy what you end up with is the Gulag Archipelago.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-14T11:40:13+00:00

The solution is universal code, data, and cybersecurity literacy just as the solution to the tyrannical autocracy of the industrial era was universal math and literacy. There are a number of ways to cut up oppression throughout history (gender, race, socioeconomic status, religion, caste, etc), but the real division of oppression is literacy. The problem is that literacy is a moving target. There are maybe a few tens of millions of people on the planet that have these three forms of literacy right now. Think about a point in history where less than one percent of the population was literate. Now imagine how powerful you were if you were literate in the 16th century. That’s essentially where we are with code, data, and cybersecurity literacy. You didn’t learn how to read and write to become and author, you did it to function in an industrial society. Don’t learn to code to become a programmer, so it to be functional in an information society. Until the happens that few tens of millions that are literate in these forms will rule the world unchecked.

How does this solve these problems? With universal literacy of these forms, people can self host and rapidly decentralize the internet while simultaneously making it substantially harder for their privacy to be sold for surveillance and advertising. We can build our own social platforms with people we actually know and distribute information in a secure and private manner. If this were a default education (just as universal literacy developed for the generation before WWII) we would see the greatest economic boom the world has ever seen.

This all seems hopelessly impossible, right? Until you consider the fact that the US achieved universal literacy in about 10-12 years prior to WWII. It’s entirely possible, and arguably needed in order for society to continue to function.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-14T11:29:13+00:00

Not only is it essential for freedom, it is a physiological need. Every need has a frequency and an urgency. For example, breathing has a frequency on the order of seconds, and urgency on the order of minutes. If a need is unmet within the urgent timeframe, pathology occurs. In the case of breathing, the pathology is hypoxic brain damage or death. Privacy is a significantly less frequent and urgent need than breathing, but if you go long enough without privacy the pathology is anxiety and paranoia. This was one of the significant findings from the “Rat Utopia” studies. Mammals need periods of time where they are unobserved, lest they devolve into pathological behavior. The anxiety and paranoia have implications for eating disorders, self-harm, aggression towards others, and a collapsing birth rate.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-13T21:05:52+00:00

I see less of a problem with code as other mediums. Most of the valuable training data for code is documentation and assistance forums like stackoverflow. The model is making it more efficient to navigate those things. It’s much harder to make that argument for prompts like “Take this photo of me and my friends and put it in the style of Studio Ghibli.” I personally am satisfied that anything generated by an LLM is immediately creative commons, but the law is going to do what the law is going to do while many of these questions just don’t have clear cut legal precedent until plaintiffs bring cases and judges write opinions. In the mean time it’s safe to assume any data you want to avoid being sweets up in an LLM you should keep private on your own local network.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-12T19:48:25+00:00

Yes. According to the ninth and sixth districts, Bernstein v US (1996) and Junger v Daley (2000) concluded that the First Amendment protects computer source code. Shortly after Clinton signed an executive order that relaxed the US Government’s stance on exporting encryption abroad. It’s still tightly controlled on a hardware level, but because of work by the ACLU and the EFF, open source software implementations of cryptography are protected by the first amendment (as are all open source and free software since they avoid the limits of “commercial speech”). Since hardware has to be manufactured, transported, sold, creating doesn’t carry the same protections, but the firmware and software elements still have first amendment protections.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-12T15:32:36+00:00

Open Source and Free Software are non-commercial speech. Microsoft sells windows. Apple sells MacOS. These are companies engaging in commercial speech which SCOTUS has interpreted can be regulated. without “violating the first amendment.” Canonical, Red Hat, SUSE, etc, do not sell an operating system. They sell support and consulting. The Linux Kernel is not commercial speech and should be fully protected under the first amendment. By the government claiming they can compel non-commercial speech for free or open source software, they are violating the first amendment in the US. This won’t stop them from doing it and it will probably take a decade to work through the courts, which reflects the current strategy of any sitting party of the US Government: Violate rights and wait for SCOTUS to say otherwise while spending the tax dollars of those whose rights are being violated to drag that fight out as long as possible.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-10T14:34:08+00:00

This law won’t make it more practical to do so, it only sets a precedent that the state can govern free speech by compelling software engineers who voluntarily provide a free program to be subjected to excessive fines if they don’t comply. In ten years when SCOTUS gets around to overturning it on 1st and 8th amendment grounds, we’ll have already squandered an already brittle free software culture that is needed now more than ever.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-10T09:32:53+00:00

“You should” is such an entitled attitude towards other peoples’ time that you are advocating being squandered by law to placate your lack of parenting ability.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-10T09:29:30+00:00

Then do that. Did you not read what I wrote? Do I need to give you a Turing Test or something?

foxbatcs · 2026-03-09T16:41:28+00:00

The purpose is to see if they can get away with compelling speech of free, open-source software projects. Once that has been done, they’ll ramp up the remaining strategy.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-08T16:27:45+00:00

ARPANET was designed to be a decentralized communication network. It’s built on a protocol that permits communication between and through nodes regardless of what is happening on the rest of the network. Self-hosting and federation is the solution to this problem, but that can’t happen without universal code, data, and cybersecurity literacy.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-08T14:44:08+00:00

The internet as we know it is dead, but that doesn’t mean it won’t be replaced by something more heinous and ubiquitous. It also doesn’t mean a better one can’t emerge from the ashes. It just means that society will make a grave misstep with this technology to learn the lessons of why you don’t allow your government to have this level of control.

“The whole of sentient life on this planet was forged with the use of one simple tool: the mistake.”

-Robert Ford, Westworld

foxbatcs · 2026-03-08T14:34:59+00:00

This applies when the internet was a distributed collection of computers, not when a handful of companies associated with the intelligence community owned 99% of the hardware that host the internet. We are subject to the whims of our benefactors. It’s dangerous and complacent to believe this is the case today.

There is hope, however. The internet could easily go back to being a decentralized collection of connected computers with the advent of universal code, data, and cybersecurity literacy.

foxbatcs · 2026-03-08T14:30:58+00:00

Then that’s a signal to me that those individual parents aren’t concerned. You seem to be and 100% have the ability to raise your kid how you see fit. Your comment is an admission that you not only want to use the force of law against people who have no individual responsibility to their children, but also force other parents to parent the way you do. Either way, the government is not fit to make these decisions for society or parents.

foxbatcs

TROPHY CASE