What is Hackers' Pub?

Hackers' Pub is a place for software engineers to share their knowledge and experience with each other. It's also an ActivityPub-enabled social network, so you can follow your favorite hackers in the fediverse and get their latest posts in your feed.

I don’t care if generative AI exists.

If it collapses, gets regulated out, or proves useless, fine. Oh well.

What I don’t like are contradictions, gatekeeping, and techno-puritanism pretending to be ethics.

The “is AI art or not” debate collapses the moment you watch how IP holders behave. They’re not suing AI companies into oblivion. Instead, they’re licensing, investing, and monetizing.

When remixing happens without permission, it’s theft. When remixing happens inside a system they profit from, it’s innovation. Same act. Different cheque. That already tells you everything you need to know.

That said, when it comes to the “is AI art” debate, the philosophical escape hatch—the one everyone leans on—is intent. Humans have it. AI doesn’t. Sounds clean—supposedly. Except, when humans use AI, they have intent.

Which is why the supposed difference between AI and every other tool based on derivative works—such as sampling, collaging, quoting, etc.—doesn’t survive contact.

Intent doesn’t live in tools. Samplers don’t have it. Cameras don’t. DAWs don’t. LLMs don’t. People do.

If someone is prompting, re-prompting, rejecting outputs, selecting results, and deploying them for a purpose, intent exists. You don’t accidentally iterate. Complaining that the machine does all the work while also complaining people are prompting wrong is just holding two incompatible ideas at once. Pick one.

When that contradiction shows up, the argument mutates. Now it’s about quality. Or effort. Or struggle. Or depth. Or audience response. Or how it feels wrong.

None of that matters. Bad art is still intentional. Lazy choices are still choices. Audience response is downstream. Art doesn’t exist because people like it. It exists because someone made it. If struggle or popularity were required, most art history wouldn’t qualify.

None of this is new for me. This is the same position I’ve held for years. Composition over technique. Exploration over purity. Feeling over formula.

Tools don’t matter. Credentials don’t matter. Approved processes don’t matter. That’s why purity tests set off alarms.

Once you strip them away, the debate stops being about art and starts being about power. One rule for individuals. Another for systems backed by capital. Funny how that keeps happening.

RE: https://atomicpoet.org/objects/1d743389-00c1-48fc-932d-9a35cddb3442

0
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
2
1
0
1
1
0
0

CU, 영화 속 발바닥 팝시클 재현한 '주토피아 아이스바' 출시
(서울=연합뉴스) 조민정 기자 = 편의점 CU는 디즈니 애니메이션 영화 '주토피아'에 등장하는 아이스크림을 실제 상품으로 구현한 '주토피아 아이...
yna.co.kr/view/AKR202512280091

0
0
0
0
2
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
5
0
0

Abusers always try to test how far they can push the line, how far they can push you without consequences.

Billionaires, tech bros, and politicians you know well but that I will not name are the same.

Trying to "appease" or "ignore" them never works.

Anyone who has dealt with abusers before knows this. The only thing that does work is stating and enforcing strong boundaries firmly right from the start.

Right now, absolutely nobody is doing this with them. And so, the abuse will only escalate.

0
0
0
0
1
2
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1

🌗 理查·斯托曼於 1984 年首屆駭客大會:珍貴歷史影像
➤ 追溯自由軟體運動的初心:從 1984 年首屆駭客大會看斯托曼的哲學
youtube.com/watch?v=Hf2pfzzWPYE
本段影片記錄了自由軟體運動創始人理查·斯托曼(Richard Stallman)在 1984 年首屆駭客大會上的身影。這段珍貴影像取自 1985 年的經典紀錄片《駭客:電子時代的奇才》(Hackers: Wizards of the Electronic Age),忠實呈現了斯托曼在 GNU 計劃啟動初期,對軟體自由與資訊分享精神的熱切倡議。影片不僅捕捉了他早年的思辯風采,更見證了改變當代運算生態的意識形態如何萌芽。
+ 看到當年如此年輕且充滿鬥志的 RMS 令人激動,那是駭客精神最純粹的黃金時代。
+ 這段紀錄片片段是極其重要的歷史檔案,讓我們理解當今開源世界的根基是如何奠定的。
#

0
0
0
0
0
1

The documentation for this image processing library by @vrubaCharlie Loyd is one of the most interesting things I've read in weeks:

github.com/celoyd/potato/blob/
github.com/celoyd/potato/blob/
github.com/celoyd/potato/blob/

Philosophical discussion of the nature of seeing and what am image is vs a map, fascinating technical details about how satellite imaging works and why it looks as bad as it often does, a lot of really thoughtful conversation about engineering and aesthetic process, and even an amusing unit of measurement — grams per terrapixel.

0
0
0
1