So my systems recently updated to rsync 3.4.3, and as soon as that happened my backup system - which does incremental backups using multiple --compare-dest= arguments - started to fail on anything but a full backup.
-
So my systems recently updated to rsync 3.4.3, and as soon as that happened my backup system - which does incremental backups using multiple --compare-dest= arguments - started to fail on anything but a full backup.
Revert to 3.4.1 and it works.
So I go look at the source in GitHub to see what might have changed, because there doesn't seem to be anything relevant in the changelog.
Since 3.4.1, 36 commits by "tridge and claude"
Oh for fuck's sakes.
@JeremiahFieldhaven figures
-
@JeremiahFieldhaven fork everything, it's all slop now and needs new caretakers
@cap_ybarra @JeremiahFieldhaven on rsync, this is scary. It's getting to a point where just stopping updates for a while on crucial systems seems safer than applying them.
-
@cap_ybarra @JeremiahFieldhaven on rsync, this is scary. It's getting to a point where just stopping updates for a while on crucial systems seems safer than applying them.
@mavu @cap_ybarra @JeremiahFieldhaven 3.4.3 looks like mostly security changes (couple bugs say security fixes broke their thing, so it might be the case for your problem). If you only ever rsync with trusted machines, you're all good, but more broadly sitting out future security fixes is less appealing than sitting out future features
-
@JeremiahFieldhaven https://aidirtylist.info/citations/andrew-tridge-pushes-flurry-of-code-slop-to-rsync-respository/ thanks for catching that. I've cited your post here
@gryphonmyers @JeremiahFieldhaven checking the GitHub repo i see a lot of recent regressions... Lovely
-
So my systems recently updated to rsync 3.4.3, and as soon as that happened my backup system - which does incremental backups using multiple --compare-dest= arguments - started to fail on anything but a full backup.
Revert to 3.4.1 and it works.
So I go look at the source in GitHub to see what might have changed, because there doesn't seem to be anything relevant in the changelog.
Since 3.4.1, 36 commits by "tridge and claude"
Oh for fuck's sakes.
@JeremiahFieldhaven Do people not even read or test the output of these agents when using them? I've used them as a crutch, but never as a replacement, so I can at least understand what the output is before I push it to someone to review. It's more of a finding the spoons and the hours of typing away to finish something I want done so I can use it. I wish the same could be said of all these people inflicting unvetted changes on untold thousands or even millions of users.
-
@sinbad @JeremiahFieldhaven What an idiotic thing to do to a piece of software with a venerable past and whose key feature is its reliability. All these OSS maintainers just burning decades of trust over a perceived 10-ish % “efficiency gain” with snowballing amounts of evidence to the contrary, and a looming bubble implosion on the horizon.
@distractal @sinbad @JeremiahFieldhaven Though I'm not sure how much the 10-ish % "efficiency gain" is when I can ask an agent to solve a problem for me in 5-15 minutes, or I can spend literally hours poring over a code base to understand what I need to do to fix it myself.
-
@distractal @sinbad @JeremiahFieldhaven Though I'm not sure how much the 10-ish % "efficiency gain" is when I can ask an agent to solve a problem for me in 5-15 minutes, or I can spend literally hours poring over a code base to understand what I need to do to fix it myself.
@chris @sinbad @JeremiahFieldhaven Here's my question... is it really, solving the problem for you? Like, actually? Given all of the costs in the full context of how it operates?
I don't believe that it is.
Can you trust everything it outputs? Are you able to catch any problems with it 100% of the time? Are you somehow able to avoid it anchoring your thinking around a particular method?
Let's assume it does solve the problem, and that somehow a purely ethical AI is produced that magically solves the labor, environment, plagiarism issues, and that is correct 100% of the time.
Even if it does, you are slowly eroding your ability to solve problems of that nature independent of the agent.
No matter how careful you are, no matter how smart, how skilled, how well-versed.
You cannot beat cognitive surrender.
-
@distractal @sinbad @JeremiahFieldhaven Though I'm not sure how much the 10-ish % "efficiency gain" is when I can ask an agent to solve a problem for me in 5-15 minutes, or I can spend literally hours poring over a code base to understand what I need to do to fix it myself.
-
@chris @sinbad @JeremiahFieldhaven Here's my question... is it really, solving the problem for you? Like, actually? Given all of the costs in the full context of how it operates?
I don't believe that it is.
Can you trust everything it outputs? Are you able to catch any problems with it 100% of the time? Are you somehow able to avoid it anchoring your thinking around a particular method?
Let's assume it does solve the problem, and that somehow a purely ethical AI is produced that magically solves the labor, environment, plagiarism issues, and that is correct 100% of the time.
Even if it does, you are slowly eroding your ability to solve problems of that nature independent of the agent.
No matter how careful you are, no matter how smart, how skilled, how well-versed.
You cannot beat cognitive surrender.
@chris @sinbad @JeremiahFieldhaven So, given that we have NOT solved all those other problems, do you think there's even a 10% efficiency gain?
I think I was pretty generous with 10%.
-
@chris @sinbad @JeremiahFieldhaven So, given that we have NOT solved all those other problems, do you think there's even a 10% efficiency gain?
I think I was pretty generous with 10%.
@distractal @sinbad @JeremiahFieldhaven I'm fighting cognitive surrender every day. Either I get tasks done quickly, or I just give up and don't do anything at all. I mean, I could just go back to wallowing in self destructive ideation for hours on end.
-
R relay@relay.mycrowd.ca shared this topic
-
So my systems recently updated to rsync 3.4.3, and as soon as that happened my backup system - which does incremental backups using multiple --compare-dest= arguments - started to fail on anything but a full backup.
Revert to 3.4.1 and it works.
So I go look at the source in GitHub to see what might have changed, because there doesn't seem to be anything relevant in the changelog.
Since 3.4.1, 36 commits by "tridge and claude"
Oh for fuck's sakes.
@JeremiahFieldhaven oh damn it all
running screaming into the woods never to be seen again is sounding more and more like a reasonable career path
-
@cap_ybarra @JeremiahFieldhaven on rsync, this is scary. It's getting to a point where just stopping updates for a while on crucial systems seems safer than applying them.
@mavu @cap_ybarra @JeremiahFieldhaven basically, we already stopped upgrading to newer versions where ensloppification happens, but it’s now being backported under the guise of security fixes, ill though-out ones (or not-at-all in the case of slop). This is a problem.
rsyncis so critical, I wonder if there are people versed enough in it who could hard-fork the last workable pre-slop version and maintain it from there. No need for big fancy new features, just keep it working and safe and secure. (openrsyncseems to be both incomplete and unportable at this point.) -
@mavu @cap_ybarra @JeremiahFieldhaven 3.4.3 looks like mostly security changes (couple bugs say security fixes broke their thing, so it might be the case for your problem). If you only ever rsync with trusted machines, you're all good, but more broadly sitting out future security fixes is less appealing than sitting out future features
@rf @mavu @cap_ybarra @JeremiahFieldhaven not if they come with regressions
then you’d rather mitigate instead of applying the broken patches. -
@distractal @sinbad @JeremiahFieldhaven I'm fighting cognitive surrender every day. Either I get tasks done quickly, or I just give up and don't do anything at all. I mean, I could just go back to wallowing in self destructive ideation for hours on end.
@chris @distractal @sinbad @JeremiahFieldhaven i dont think you know what those words mean
and if your solveing depression with AI well thats depressing and sounds like how people talk about alcohol
-
@JeremiahFieldhaven
Oh damn it all. Tridge has fallen@mav
@JeremiahFieldhaven
Been a while since LLM/AI was shoved into ArduPilot, which is a safety-critical sUAS firmware.I have not taken my stuff out since I saw that land in the project.
Edit:
That was the only context in which I knew of tridge and his storied reputation for making safety-critical code. -
@JeremiahFieldhaven aw, goddamnit!
@spitfire @JeremiahFieldhaven You beat me to it. What is wrong with programmers who should know better?
-
@mavu @cap_ybarra @JeremiahFieldhaven basically, we already stopped upgrading to newer versions where ensloppification happens, but it’s now being backported under the guise of security fixes, ill though-out ones (or not-at-all in the case of slop). This is a problem.
rsyncis so critical, I wonder if there are people versed enough in it who could hard-fork the last workable pre-slop version and maintain it from there. No need for big fancy new features, just keep it working and safe and secure. (openrsyncseems to be both incomplete and unportable at this point.)@mirabilos @mavu @cap_ybarra @JeremiahFieldhaven There is also github.com/gokrazy/rsync which i haven't tested yet.
-
@JeremiahFieldhaven I strongly recommend (if you haven't already) point this out to the rsync maintainers. "Tridge" should have their commit privileges suspended until they can review AI slop.
@ChuckMcManis @JeremiahFieldhaven pretty sure Tridge is the original creator
-
@mavu @cap_ybarra @JeremiahFieldhaven basically, we already stopped upgrading to newer versions where ensloppification happens, but it’s now being backported under the guise of security fixes, ill though-out ones (or not-at-all in the case of slop). This is a problem.
rsyncis so critical, I wonder if there are people versed enough in it who could hard-fork the last workable pre-slop version and maintain it from there. No need for big fancy new features, just keep it working and safe and secure. (openrsyncseems to be both incomplete and unportable at this point.)@mirabilos @mavu @cap_ybarra @JeremiahFieldhaven "versed enough" and "getting versed enough" are both options, IMHO.
It's likely fine to take some time with the next round of updates.
-
@JeremiahFieldhaven fork everything, it's all slop now and needs new caretakers
@JeremiahFieldhaven @cap_ybarra Fork everything and host the forks as far away from GitHub as possible. D:<
