This PR adds split_lock_detect to the preserved_arguments list in anaconda.conf.
Currently, on recent kernels, if an x86 split lock is detected, it can cause the kernel to crash (#AC: crashing the ...
Yeah, I was reading the comment before and anyone with a vague awareness of this stuff should have called bullshit immediately.
Preserving the argument seemed an innocuous enough change though, so I could see why it was accepted, but the explanation was bafflingly stupid.
But people who don’t know eat it up. Sounded possible (until they claimed the system crashed and could not log the error, despite a log entry belt there that they ostensibly cite as the issue…).
I just don’t understand the workflow with these people.
You know how people say “don’t run a command you are given or find online unless you know exactly what it does”?
Why would anyone accept/merge a PR from an LLM unless they knew what the consequences were, or verified its claims. I just will never get this trust in LLMs, given I know even vaguely how they work.
I just will never get this trust in LLMs, given I know even vaguely how they work.
That’s probably a good stance to have. I just had an AI hallucinate the hell out of an answer and tell me 3 different times the wrong thing. I took a step back, started a new chat, and changed my question to be less specific and more general and the very first thing it spit back was bang on right.
This is just in regards to figuring some shit out in a video game, it’s alarming to me how much trust people are putting into these LLMs and the AI tech. Just a huge bubble that’s going to wreck our markets when it bursts. Eventually venture capitalists (ew) do want a return on investment - and that just is not going to happen.
I think the great AI bubble burst, whenever that happens in the next 1 to 3 years, will make the dot com crash and 2008 housing crash look like peanuts and that’s gonna be real bad for lots of people.
But hey, the earth keeps on spinning, we’re just along for the ride.*
*Unless you’re a filthy rich member of the borgeousie, in which case, for the love of God have your tech buddies reign this shit in.
We bought an apartment right before the Ukraine war started. It was before the construction of the building so we had to wait a few years before moving in. Had to pay a lot more interest than we had planned after the war broke out. Add the pandemic to that as well.
And now we have an AI bubble about to burst right when we’re looking to maybe buy a house.
FML, this world isn’t how I imagined it would be when I was growing up.
Yeah I’m in the USA so idk if you’re here or not too but yeah … As an elder millennial the world is not how I imagined it’d be when I was a kid.
I mean, I got pretty jaded pretty quick growing up so I’ve always been a bit pessimistic but maybe more so I’m realistic. I hoped things would get better when we were at least trying to tackle some issues with global climate change - now it feels like we’re giving up and just marching towards even more destruction of the planet.
That was 20+ years ago … I always imagined that humanity would probably turn this place into a Hive World but I desperately want to be wrong about that. So far we’re trending in that direction.
Well, in this case, the actual change is pointless, but also relatively harmless. If the user puts “split_lock_detect=” during install, then it just carries it forward into the installed environment.
It’s frankly a bit weird that they assume a kernel argument during install would not carry over, except in select circumstances. I get it for parameters like “here’s a kickstart file” or “here’s the net configuration to boot with”, which would be filtered out via a blacklist, but they have a whitelist and assume most parameters should be ignored.
But anyway, I can see someone looking at the code change, not recognizing why someone would want that argument, but shrug and say “sure, simple enough, it won’t impact the vast majority of people and those that bother for whatever reason will just see it carried forward”.
But clearly it wasn’t something anyone wanted as it was later reverted, and not kept in because it was supposedly harmless.
I get what you’re saying though. I’m just glad someone in those comments actually analyzed the situation instead of putting their trust in the charismatic LLM. Those people still exist!
Funny part is that if it just stated “sometimes the user needs this argument, and if they need this argument for install they will need it to boot”, they might have shrugged and let it slide. In trying to overexplain, it betrayed that there was no actual understanding behind it.
Yeah, I was reading the comment before and anyone with a vague awareness of this stuff should have called bullshit immediately.
Preserving the argument seemed an innocuous enough change though, so I could see why it was accepted, but the explanation was bafflingly stupid.
But people who don’t know eat it up. Sounded possible (until they claimed the system crashed and could not log the error, despite a log entry belt there that they ostensibly cite as the issue…).
I just don’t understand the workflow with these people.
You know how people say “don’t run a command you are given or find online unless you know exactly what it does”?
Why would anyone accept/merge a PR from an LLM unless they knew what the consequences were, or verified its claims. I just will never get this trust in LLMs, given I know even vaguely how they work.
That’s probably a good stance to have. I just had an AI hallucinate the hell out of an answer and tell me 3 different times the wrong thing. I took a step back, started a new chat, and changed my question to be less specific and more general and the very first thing it spit back was bang on right.
This is just in regards to figuring some shit out in a video game, it’s alarming to me how much trust people are putting into these LLMs and the AI tech. Just a huge bubble that’s going to wreck our markets when it bursts. Eventually venture capitalists (ew) do want a return on investment - and that just is not going to happen.
I think the great AI bubble burst, whenever that happens in the next 1 to 3 years, will make the dot com crash and 2008 housing crash look like peanuts and that’s gonna be real bad for lots of people.
But hey, the earth keeps on spinning, we’re just along for the ride.*
*Unless you’re a filthy rich member of the borgeousie, in which case, for the love of God have your tech buddies reign this shit in.
It’s gonna suck.
We bought an apartment right before the Ukraine war started. It was before the construction of the building so we had to wait a few years before moving in. Had to pay a lot more interest than we had planned after the war broke out. Add the pandemic to that as well.
And now we have an AI bubble about to burst right when we’re looking to maybe buy a house.
FML, this world isn’t how I imagined it would be when I was growing up.
Yeah I’m in the USA so idk if you’re here or not too but yeah … As an elder millennial the world is not how I imagined it’d be when I was a kid.
I mean, I got pretty jaded pretty quick growing up so I’ve always been a bit pessimistic but maybe more so I’m realistic. I hoped things would get better when we were at least trying to tackle some issues with global climate change - now it feels like we’re giving up and just marching towards even more destruction of the planet.
That was 20+ years ago … I always imagined that humanity would probably turn this place into a Hive World but I desperately want to be wrong about that. So far we’re trending in that direction.
I’m not in the US but this shit hits globally, especially the Ukraine war which is closer to me here in Europe.
I’m at least lucky to be driving an EV and not being affected so much by the gas prices, which are now back to peak pandemic/Ukraine war prices.
Had a friend telling me they filled half a tank for like $90. Pretty crazy. Meanwhile charging from 20–90% is like $15 for me.
Well, in this case, the actual change is pointless, but also relatively harmless. If the user puts “split_lock_detect=” during install, then it just carries it forward into the installed environment.
It’s frankly a bit weird that they assume a kernel argument during install would not carry over, except in select circumstances. I get it for parameters like “here’s a kickstart file” or “here’s the net configuration to boot with”, which would be filtered out via a blacklist, but they have a whitelist and assume most parameters should be ignored.
But anyway, I can see someone looking at the code change, not recognizing why someone would want that argument, but shrug and say “sure, simple enough, it won’t impact the vast majority of people and those that bother for whatever reason will just see it carried forward”.
But clearly it wasn’t something anyone wanted as it was later reverted, and not kept in because it was supposedly harmless.
I get what you’re saying though. I’m just glad someone in those comments actually analyzed the situation instead of putting their trust in the charismatic LLM. Those people still exist!
Funny part is that if it just stated “sometimes the user needs this argument, and if they need this argument for install they will need it to boot”, they might have shrugged and let it slide. In trying to overexplain, it betrayed that there was no actual understanding behind it.