101–110 of 148 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder how those companies will deal with the upcoming AI features in Windows and macOS.
apple and microsoft have historically provided ways of turning off features that their corporate customers don't want. I doubt this will be any different.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
It's been in beta for a year. There's been plenty of community discussion in that time, mostly around testing the feature. It was only after the release that all this outrage happened.
Is there a reason to "not like how we got here" then?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>very valid concerns The AI stuff is disabled by default, the concerns are unfounded.
In security, minimization is always preferred over hardening. Always.
It was never really a case of "AI shoved down our throats" anyways. People just assumed it was and got their pitchforks and torches out. The feature was always opt-in. I'm sorry gnachman had to endure this nonsense.
Outside this bubble here, AI (in its most recent form) is pretty unpopular. No one wants a tool they like to be associated with this just like it would be annoying to start seeing ads in it.
Funny because I experience the exact opposite. I see HN extremely negative about anything AI related while my personal acquaintance are excited and enjoying in their apps and tools they use
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that it can be. As was pointed out in the original issue to remove it, the feature is not disabled, it is unconfigured. Put anything in the box for the OpenAI key, valid or not, and the functionality to send data to OpenAI is active. Accidentally put a [space] in that box and it looks like there is nothing there, but it's doing things you didn't expect. That was the wrong way to do it. The feature should have…
You still have to take the action to enable the AI features even if you just have a " " character in that field, no? It doesn't send anything to openAI until you open the prompt for it to do so.
If you leave the field empty (open to accident) and you don't press this button in this function that you may use for other things (open to accident) it doesn't send data where you didn't expect it to. This is functionally equivalent to you can accidentally send data you didn't mean to. This is simply prevented with a real toggle to disable the function.
I don't know about you, but I have clicked on things I didn't mean to because I lost where the mouse is, or because I'm giving a window focus again, it is not an accident that doesn't happen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> why did the developer decide to add the feature in the first place? Was it community feedback or some other mechanism that inspired this choice? You're moving the goalposts and again putting the developer in a position where they have to justify themselves. Which they don't. As GP puts it: "But iTerm is a free (both as in gratis and as in libre) open source project. The developer released a feature that they were p…
> putting the developer in a position where they have to justify themselves I'm putting those who offer criticism of the community at large in a position to justify why they're surprised by the outcome. > The developer released a feature that they were probably happy and excited about. Then they should ignore the criticism. If you want to build what your heart desires there is nothing stopping you. If you expect the…
I'm not surprised. I'm disappointed.
> If you expect the community who uses your software to uncritically accept what you've done and offer no negative feedback [...]
My point isn't that there shouldn't be feedback. Feedback is important, both positive and negative, especially if it's constructive. But you can and should (and this is really my point) present negative feedback in a manner that is respectful of the project and the developers. It doesn't need to be unkind.
Take this exchange, for example. We may disagree, you may dislike my arguments and I may dislike yours, but we're having a civil discussion. This is healthy. Some of the feedback in relation to this feature on the other hand wasn't in good faith and wasn't civil. There have been allegations of covert data collection, personal attacks on the developers and vocabulary such as 'piece of crap'. This is the behavior I'm criticizing.
This whole ordeal was absolutely absurd and anyone who commented on that Gitlab thread, here on HN, or on other social media are the biggest bunch of entitled crybabies I've ever seen. I've said my piece on this many times over the last few days here on HN so I won't repeat myself but if you were one of the people complaining then I want you to know in no uncertain terms that you are what's wrong with open source and…
I feel really sorry for the developer. I've only been a casual observer, but from my view point the community's reaction was... not great, to put it lightly. I get that a lot of us are tired of 'AI' being shoved down our throat at every possible turn. I get that a lot of us have privacy concerns. I get that maybe you don't want it in your terminal emulator. But iTerm is a free (both as in gratis and as in libre) open…
I wonder if a lot of the heated discussion is purely an emotional reaction to be hit with "AI feature onboarding" immediately after a normally-drama-free terminal emulator software update. If they had gone with a much more low-key way of notifying users of the feature, maybe folks would be more reasonable. Not that I blame the maintainers for using the approach they did, though! Usually you do want to be super obviou…
Whenever any software I use changes anymore, I instinctively expect it to get worse because the developer chose to add something unwanted. It's a sad state for software in general.
I'm not an iTerm2 user and the attitude of the developer in the response has certainly convinced me to never become one. I understand open source developers get burnt out, particularly with backlash from demanding users who contribute nothing in return, but the contempt for users with very valid concerns about AI and data leaks is not a healthy sign.
> the attitude of the developer in the response has certainly convinced me to never become one If you are a Mac user and not using (or at least considering) iTerm2, you are doing yourself a disservice. It is by far the best terminal emulator available and runs circles around the built-in option. If you are a not a Mac user, then the entire discussion is moot either way.
How so?
The comment for the change contains a note of bitterness: > I have two goals in this change: To allow developers in restrictive but technically incompetent organizations to continue to use iTerm2. That is, they disallow anything that could potentially exfiltrate data, but don't have their act together enough to implement MDM. So that people who hate AI can feel at ease that no AI will happen by accident without havin…
> To allow developers in restrictive but technically incompetent organizations to continue to use iTerm2 I mean sure it was a brash way of putting it but he's not wrong. I contract with an org that basically shuts off access to anything that is in any way related to AI, we can't even visit the OpenAI website on our computers. If this feature was part of core iTerm2 then 100% they would have banned the use of iTerm.