The OG repo seems to be back. Now I’m stumped on my theory.

That I cannot answer, maybe he took over as the main dev and moved the work to his repo. Maybe there’s some other explanation.

Well there’s no real benefit to compressing and encoding the file in the repo, it’s a JSON config. Other than obfuscation, of course.

My theory was something like:

• Repo A (paulo-roger) abandoned at 2023
• Repo B (asimons04) forked and worked from there
• Repo C (OP)

Now what happens if repo B is removed (privated)? We still have all the commit history form repo B, but no upstream to link to that history. We also have all the commit history form repo A, however the upstream is still public so it gets linked properly.

The fork chain is still the same A -> b -> C we just no longer see repo B on github. It doesn’t mean that anything got moved, deleted or overwritten, just hidden.

As far as I can tell it’s a base64 encoded gziped json file in the repo.

HailSeitanDrinkCocaCola

thx

Isn’t it in a gziped file within the repo tho? policy.dat?

Well yeah. The guy made a bunch of commits, you forked, they privated the repo. The repo you forked “no longer exists” so parent fork is reported. Nobody renamed their account, nobody transferred the repo.

More likely they privated their repo. Your fork is way ahead with this devs commits. I’d guess the dev made a fork of the paulo-roger repo when they stopped the development.

The change feels like a slippery slope where it could be easily abused if there’s enough incentive. Like the DMCA (I think that’s the acronym) process on youtube or github, or etc.

Maybe you’re right, time will tell.

Hot take: I don’t like this. It states a rule, but the line is vague.
How is vibe coding detected? How much is too much? How does this apply to my personal vibe coded util™? Does this apply to private repos?

The rule feels ill defined while the consequences are quite extreme.

It would be nice to have some overlay of the two images with a difference to see what changed.

Bold of you to assume I’ve heard of any designer or even know what a summer look book is supposed to be (I guess the name is quite self explanatory).

Morality doesn’t even matter here. The act is just disgusting. I wouldn’t be surprised that such reaction somewhat evolutionary.

That being said I don’t think morality even applies here. That’s why I originally worded my comment: not immoral. An act can be neither in which case it’s pointless to argue any side.

I always went with VLC until something got messed up with new laptops nVidia drivers. For whatever reason VLC could not properly use dedicated GPU acceleration with open drivers.

That’s when I tried out MPV. I like it, I like the minimalism, I like the CLI. It’s been working great so far.

For someone more technical MPV, for anyone else I’d still recommend VLC.

No clue, I know of Sesame Street only from occasional memes. I always thought it all one and the same, since it’s all puppets.

It not being immoral being moral or immoral has nothing to do with it being dangerous and disgusting. Asking about morality of fucking roadkill is basic strawman does nothing to checkmate anything.

Are Muppets good or is this more of a nostalgia thing for people?

I’ve never seen Muppets. I don’t remember it airing on our national TV when I was a child. It’s not much of a thing in my social circles either.

I hope that clears things up.

Not really. You had me in the first half, tho.

I’ve seen other takes of this in the comments and I’m inclined to agree with them.

I don’t believe the rules are as much about enforcement as they are about setting the tone. Yes, it seems very broad, but it’s much easier to point to a rule than to waste time arguing what is and is not a valid contribution.
The educational aspect isn’t the only thing no AI rules try to achieve. Denial of attention has become a real thing since LLMs were introduced, so having a strict no AI policy helps to save maintainer time.
Again this can be brought back to the educational argument: if a maintainer is spending time arguing about validity of AI contributions, they’re not sharing knowledge, but I’m not sure if that’s really the case in this particular instance.