This exposes, yet again, what should be the most commonly acknowledge flaw to exist in AI;
It doesn't actually KNOW anything.
AI has no actual comprehension, and it never will. It can mimic, obviously, to varying degrees of success. But it doesn't actually KNOW what it is 'saying', and without comprehension there will forever be wrong answers or hallucinations.
I see current AIs as tools—a sophisticated lathe, not a thinking partner. The question isn't whether it "knows" anything.
The interesting question is: why does AI with correct information in its weights still give wrong answers? That's an engineering problem, not a metaphysics problem.
But here's what bothers me about the "AI doesn't truly know" argument: do we? When a senior dev answers "use Kubernetes" without asking about team size or user count, are they "comprehending" or pattern-matching on what sounds authoritative? The AI failure I described is identical to what I see in human experts daily.
Maybe the flaw isn't unique to AI. Maybe it's a mirror.
Why not both? It's certainly true that human 'experts' often rely on pattern-matching without fully understanding a problem. But AI has no understanding at all, so pattern matching is its only skill, whereas human capacity for understanding isn't only greater than AI, it's fundamentally different. In what ways? That seems to be the multi-trillion dollar question.
If you are getting your OS from some third party torrent packager you are doing it wrong. There are far easier ways to get around this without trusting that some mysterious third party hasn't embedded some malware in their custom Windows deployment.
You're doing that pretty much regardless of what OS you use. Yes, I agree MS has issues, but legitimate malware has not yet been a line they have crossed.
If I created a program that took screenshots and keylogged everything that you did, and then put it in your computer, you'd rightly call it malware. But, when Microsoft does this, it isn't? They aren't exactly trustworthy (as you said, it has issues).
Companies keep generating this proliferation of xyz-ware names to distract from the fact that anything that works against the user's interest is fundamentally malware.
With Microsoft allegedly trying to close down all those ways, it sure sounds like OS modification (or not using Windows) is the reasonable endgame here? I'm not sure how this comment, saying to not use modified OSes but use the "far easier ways", fits with the submitted article. Not everyone has the skills to modify the compiled code files that make Windows require a Microsoft account
If it's so easy, which are these ways, then? Do you think they'll remain available indefinitely?
Not that I don't underwrite the risks involved in getting your OS from untrusted or unreputable sources
The simplest remaining way that I am aware of is actually an autounattend file. This is a Microsoft supplied method that has been around for a long time and something that I truly believe will stick around untouched because it is pretty much a requirement of any enterprise Windows deployment.
Not only does it allow you to create a local admin account, but you can also skip all the other setup screens that you want by pre-supplying values. Throw this file into your Windows boot media, do a fresh install (which you should be doing when you get a new machine regardless), and away you go. I use this both personally and my work environment. Not only are you then not relying on modifying OS ISO's or compilations, but an XML file is relatively easy to verify that only the settings you have set are the ones being input into the system if you utilize a third party tool like the one available at schneegeas.de
I know there are more direct sources. But for the amount of mental energy I want to invest into Windows, discovery through torrents is far easier. My workflow consists of creating a VM, installing / updating everything, taking a snapshot, then removing network access before it gets access to Samba shares with any private information.
I suppose I might still be worried about targeted offline-acting malware if I were using Windows to control some enrichment centrifuges or something. But apart from that, I'm fine with whatever inhabitants it may have frolicking in their isolated jungle.
There is no comparison. Linux suffers from "not my department" syndrome. If some component in the stack borks the install you are in hell trying to fix it and risk breaking something else.
Windows for all its faults still has some semblance of the majority of the OS being developed under one roof so things actually work together.
Post like this mystify me. I’ve been on Ubuntu since 2008 and I’ve never once had a failed install. Now installing redhat from floppies in 1998? Yes that sucked. But it’s been a good experience for a really long time.
I ran into a bug about a year ago with the Ubuntu installer that caused it to crash on me when I was trying to install it on my Framework laptop. I had to try multiple times before the install finally went through.
It takes a good six months before Linux supports new hardware well. Usually LTS (or even other) Ubuntu is not recent enough. I recommend Fedora on such machines, and later on Mint (no snap).
I knew someone was going to reply about it being a hardware thing. Ubuntu was listed on Framework's compatibility page as being fully supported. And the hardware was not particularly special or cutting edge. Also, the installer is STILL bugged even with 25.10. Not crashing, but if you connect to WiFi in the installer, when you click next it sits the indefinitely waiting for it to connect even after you can see in the system tray that it's connected.
And I tried Fedora at the time but, if I remember correctly, that was the distro that wouldn't load the fingerprint sensor settings page.
So Ubuntu has a bug.
Framework support means they have tried it and it generally works. They aren’t able to fix absolutely anything that might go wrong.
Fedora changes more rapidly so may have seen fixes. I prefer Mint to Ubuntu, worth a try though it is typically older.
You didn’t mention the card you’re using so hard to help further.
Ubuntu used to be "hot shit", but I don't think I'd recommend it for any reason these days, especially since it doesn't support Flatpaks.
Pop_OS!, Fedora, etc. are all better and much more stable, and I can't see this changing given Shuttleworth's weird, bizzare, misogynistic, and ableist hiring practices.
Pop_OS is the one I will likely settle on once Cosmic is out of beta.
I will say I don't' have a strong opinion on Snap vs Flatpak, but I didn't know that about the CEO's hiring practices. Definitely not interested in touching Ubuntu again after reading some first-hand accounts of his behavior.
> There is no comparison. Linux suffers from "not my department" syndrome. If some component in the stack borks the install you are in hell trying to fix it and risk breaking something else.
>
> Windows for all its faults still has some semblance of the majority of the OS being developed under one roof so things actually work together.
My favourite part of Windows is how opening the start menu causes CPU usage to spike because the start menu is made using React, versus using native UI components for it. Is... that the kind of "working together" that you mean?
I've been running Linux since 2009 and these complaints are fine to pull out when levelled at contemporary Linux, but it's grown up hugely since Valve started throwing money at it. I haven't had to do any major config on a Linux distro outside of "things I wanted to do with it, just because" since around 2021 (this includes games via Steam or Lutris). Meanwhile I very, very regularly have to hear stories from people about how much work they're putting into their Windows setup just to have a remotely functional OS, including replacing the entire start menu component with a random hack made by a private non-Microsoft sanctioned group.
It's honestly very funny, and it's going to get funnier as the trend keeps continuing.
>My favourite part of Windows is how opening the start menu causes CPU usage to spike because the start menu is made using React, versus using native UI components for it. Is... that the kind of "working together" that you mean?
Yeah your one edge case is totally the reality for the billions of people that use Windows daily. To be more clear since I expected these kids of responses: On the mean the OS is the most cohesive out of all of them. Its still a 30+ year old collection of code despite being made under one roof, its going to have edge cases.
If you have have to start your comment with Id didn't have to do that or it works for me then its "not my department" syndrome.
Bullshit. If you try to troubleshoot your windows problems by looking for answers on the internet, you get "certified microsoft experts" giving you tips like "update your antivirus, flip the power cable, and defragment your hard drive" to fix your driver issues.
Searching for problems about linux is going to yield much higher quality results.
The point is that you buy a computer from the store, install userland apps and it most likely won't have those problems I mentioned out of the box. Thats good enough for the billions that continue to use Windows, Linux can't even do that.
Of course it's difficult for Linux to support devices when a) the OEMs have contracts with Microsoft, b) the OEMs are writing drivers for windows, and c) Linux developers have to reverse-engineer said drivers to provide a modicum of support, with all of the legal and technical challenges thereof.
I don't think it's fair to blame Linux for "bad device support" when really it's entirely on the OEM and how shitty they are to non-Microsoft developers, and that varies a lot between manufacturer. A Lenovo Thinkpad, for example, is almost guaranteed to have a decent-to-good level of support because of how they, as a company, act and implement their systems. Other manufacturers like Asus, the relationship is more adversarial.
Linux support of mainline devices is in many ways expecting to catch up to a freight train with a little handcar. The fact that Linux supports so many devices and that I've been able to use it satisfactorily for every day work and life on Thinkpads, HP Pavilions, and other random devices, is itself a miracle. The fact that you can install it on a laptop and expect it to mostly work with only maybe sound card issues or lid detection issues, is itself a testament to the skill and effort invested in it. And then when there are problems, it's easy to dril down to the root of things. Versus my dad's USB and wifi card randomly disabling itself within Windows and there being no support for this and no way to figure out what's wrong.
I understand the desire to get out from under the MS umbrella, as there are definitely legitimate gripes. But I also see the irony that if you have the technical ability to install a Linux distro, you definitely have the technical ability to use an autounattend XML.
I don't know about openly hostile. Definitely making moves that the user base openly disagree with and think are, at best, very bad decisions, but I don't think they have crossed the "hostile" line. And MS is not alone with those kinds of decisions.
Apple may not "force" you to use an iCloud account for their devices, but they sure push it hard.
As far as Linux communities go, Red Hat, Arch, Cisco, and even Ubuntu have also done their fair share of "bad decisions".
everybody else is doing it doesnt excuse the issue.
when users make a technical effort to workaround these bad decisions, and you keep chasing after them, subverting said technical measures, in order to enforce said bad decisions, this has gone far beyond being bad decisions; it is being done on purpose to prevent users from opting out of a Hostile ecosystem.
What would it take for you to admit they are openly hostile? Removing the ability to install without internet, taking up resources on your computer by stuffing more and more forced ai onto you that nobody asked for, resetting default browser preferences, taking screenshots of everything you do, baiting people into uploading their private files onto the cloud through onedrive, and this is still not enough? You still go "oh I don't know about openly hostile?? Hello???
I'm currently trying to set one up. What do I have to put in there so the OOBE is skipped, or at least skip the online account part? My goal is to install a Windows 11 in a VM with zero user interaction.
Edit: Actually, currently the whole thing is failing after the second reboot for other reasons. I get an error that says there is some malformed command in the unattend.xml or something. Couldn't fully debug it yet - it's possible the setup succeeds after I figure this one out.
Apparently Canada made an agreement with the U.S. a while back to place a 100% tariff on a line of affordable EVs made by Chinese manufacturers (I don't remember the name right now).
I suspect a reversal of that decision may be in the works.
Alot of Canadians are requesting that. Not just about retaliation, but in many respects (battery swapping terminals, feature sets), Chinese EVs are pulling ahead of North American vehicles.
Canada did a lot to support US industry because it was working well for us as well as the Americans. If the US is going to disrespect us and threaten us, we might as well lean into our relationships with other trade partners.
It doesn't actually KNOW anything.
AI has no actual comprehension, and it never will. It can mimic, obviously, to varying degrees of success. But it doesn't actually KNOW what it is 'saying', and without comprehension there will forever be wrong answers or hallucinations.
reply