- On the idea of a kill switch: while I said that we won’t add a “global kill switch”, all of these capabilities will be delivered as Snaps to the OS, layered on top of the existing Ubuntu stack. That means there will always be the option of removing those Snaps - which I suppose acts as a sort of kill switch for the features we’re planning on shipping.
- Opt-in vs Opt-out: my plan is to introduce AI-backed features as a “preview” on a strictly opt-in basis in 26.10. In subsequent releases, my plan is to have a step in the initial setup wizard that allows the user to choose whether or not they’d like the AI-native features enabled. Because of the size of most LLMs, we simply couldn’t ship them in the installer anyway, so opting out at first run is simple: they just won’t be there.
Point of order: “you can easily remove the Snaps from your install” is an opt-out mechanism. Calling these features “opt-in” is gaslighting.
Calling these features “opt-in” is gaslighting.
Opt-in vs Opt-out: my plan is to introduce AI-backed features as a “preview” on a strictly opt-in basis in 26.10. In subsequent releases, my plan is to have a step in the initial setup wizard that allows the user to choose whether or not they’d like the AI-native features enabled. Because of the size of most LLMs, we simply couldn’t ship them in the installer anyway, so opting out at first run is simple: they just won’t be there .
it’s not gaslighting, you just didn’t comprehend what you read, then quoted them saying the exact opposite of what they said.
“you can easily remove the Snaps from your install” is an opt-out mechanism.
Because of the size of most LLMs, we simply couldn’t ship them in the installer anyway, so opting out at first run is simple: they just won’t be there.
if you have to click a button to download the software, that’s not opt-out. that’s going out of your way to download something that doesn’t ship with the product you’re installing. now, I didn’t bother reading the article, I’m just taking your word that they said that. but it was written in your comment, so I don’t think there’s any good reason why you wouldn’t know what you put there. and it makes sense that it would be opt-in, you’re talking about models that are twice as big as the rest of the OS.
Shhhh… No facts, only hate
The further it goes, the less appealing Ubuntu is to me.
I’m on the fence between using OpenSUSE Tumbleweed or Debian.
I’m just so comfortable using the Debian packaging system thanks to Ubuntu that I kind of dread having to re-learn RPM. Though they made it simple with Zypper.
Also OpenSUSE’s avantage is the easy installation on a BTRFS filesystem with snapper that creates grub entries making restoration really easy.
Now I haven’t tried installing NVidia drivers yet. This might be a challenge for either distros.
Debian is a solid distro, so use that if you want to stay within that environment
thats how i am with fedora. i tried cachos because everyone is jerking off to it, so i threw it up o proxmox and went to install some stuff… sudo dnf install… dang nab it.
I don’t find this convincing. Everyone knows how easy it is to click “yes” without actually knowing what’s behind it even reading it at all. There’s a reason that “I have read the terms and conditions” is the most common lie on the web. Also, no one will read a lot of information. So adding AI sounds great, doesn’t it? While this is a technical opt-in, it is still really close to an opt-out.
And then the ML generated code. I am aware it’s anecdotal evidence and might not mean anything but every time I tried Ubuntu, I deleted it after a few days because I found the bugs way too annoying after hitting too many road blocks. So if a buggy prone desktop environment additionally accepts ML code, it makes me suspicious and wanna stay away from it.
