Powered by LiveKit
Apparently it's AI coded? Or maybe not?
What does powered by mean when LiveKit is about AI agents?
Are we letting AI agents meet instead of ourselves?
The linked LiveKit website and linked LiveKit blog post seem completely disconnected. I don't get it.
What does “all known Windows privacy and telemetry settings” entail and mean?
Registry and group policy?
Is this sourced from a shared effort project of known stuff, or does this project track it's own, and would need notice and updates of new settings?
No time for commas with how fast this tech is developing
AI-assisted coding […] means more ambitious, higher-quality products
I'm skeptical. From my own (limited) experience, my use-cases and projects, and the risks of using code that may include hallucinations.
there are roughly 29 million software developers worldwide serving over 5.4 billion internet users. That's one developer for every 186 users,
That's an interesting way to look at it, and that would be a far better relation than I would have expected. Not every software developer serves internet users though.
Test date 2019, and it only lands now. No wonder it's being labeled a catastrophic failure. /s
Surely it read ahead and had to roll back because it made a wrong prediction. 😏
is bricking systems really an issue/a common issue for common mutable Linux distros?
Neo4j provided database software under the AGPLv3, then tweaked the license, leading to legal battles over forks of the software. The AGPLv3 includes language that says any added restrictions or requirements are removable, meaning someone could just file off Neo4j's changes to the usage and distribution license, reverting it back to the standard AGPLv3, which the biz has argued and successfully fought against in that California district court.
The issue before the appeals court boils down to the right to remove contractual restrictions added to the terms of the APGL. This right is spelled out in AGPLv3, section 7, paragraph 4: "If the program as you received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is governed by this license along with a term that is a further restriction, you may remove that term." Other GPLs contain similar terms.
"Licensed under AGPL but not AGPL"? It's a named license that people have expectations on. I assume if they had said "licensed under aa modified AGPL license" it would have been fine? Seems reasonable/makes sense.
How does that become "may kill a GPL license"? Key word "a"? (When it's not one.)
These scrollbars with issue indicators are becoming more and more fancy
If only this post title had received descriptive text too
Next post: “Why I am moving away from Medium” (hopefully)