Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

iTerm2 removes AI feature from core, creates separate plugin

gitlab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 148 posts

Re: iTerm2 removes AI feature from core, creates separate plugin

#71

Post by leetcrew »

galad87 wrote: post #41
asdajksah2123 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Entirely optional features that have a history of not becoming optional anymore in many other applications and quite evidently can easily be installed as a plugin instead. Further, why in the world would you include a completely optional feature that runs afoul of many companies' software policies? And will be blocked by many companies even if it doesn't run afoul of their policies because nearly every competently ru…

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.

Re: iTerm2 removes AI feature from core, creates separate plugin

#73

Post by tmalsburg2 »

glhaynes wrote: post #13

People are making their whole personalities about being anti-AI. I'm personally a mix of skeptical+worried about AI; but at some point just being a reactionary ninny makes people tune out on whether there might be some truth at the core of your concern.

I‘ve never met a person who has made their whole personality about being anti-AI. Can we please calm down a bit?

Re: iTerm2 removes AI feature from core, creates separate plugin

#74

Post by boringg »

mmastrac wrote: post #3

The whole drama was pretty silly, and the fact that everyone got upset that a feature that is inactive by default, consumes no processing power, memory or anything else and bullied the author of the open-source program should make everyone unhappy. This is why open-source maintainers burn out and we can't have nice things. Honestly, people, please consider the human on the other side of the toxic discourse.

Agree - it really speaks to the issues around AI and how wrought that conversation has become. To your point that it is turned of by default - you have to opt in if you want it.

Re: iTerm2 removes AI feature from core, creates separate plugin

#75

Post by xyst »

alex_suzuki wrote: post #6

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…

This whole fiasco made me rethink why I am using iterm2 in the first place.

Have switched to alacritty. It’s basic but it does its job. It’s a terminal. Highly performant, no unnecessary bloat compared to iterm2.

Have moved my monthly donations away from iterm2.

Re: iTerm2 removes AI feature from core, creates separate plugin

#76

Post by rottencupcakes »

mmastrac wrote: post #17
rottencupcakes wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Ask yourself: is this really a productive comment? You've got an open-source author that has put a lot of effort into providing something people can use, for free, and your comment above is the toxicity they get in response? Are you really helping the world of open-source with this type of response?

Yes, you’re absolutely right.

I wasn’t aware of the drama and conflict behind this and read his press release in a vacuum.

It didn’t add anything and only added more negativity to this conflict.

Re: iTerm2 removes AI feature from core, creates separate plugin

#77

Post by AlexandrB »

rottencupcakes wrote: post #34
irskep wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those words were definitely written through gritted teeth, but it seems to me he's being very literal. The second point in particular is exactly what the anti-AI-feature people seem to be asking for (and they are reasonable for asking for it).

AI is acting as a catalyst here to get people into flame war mode. The issue here is the existence of a terminal feature that can send your commands to a 3rd party server. It could have no AI whatsoever; it is reasonable to not want this in an app that you might paste secret keys into. Do the people who don’t like this feature have the same standards for ever app they use? Probably not, they’re probably being a littl…

> The issue here is the existence of a terminal feature that can send your commands to a 3rd party server.

That's called SSH.

Re: iTerm2 removes AI feature from core, creates separate plugin

#80

Post by segasaturn »

People claiming that the negative response to OpenAI integration into iTerm is a knee-jerk reaction by a bunch of AI haters I think are missing the point.

a) Putting an LLM into iTerm introduces almost no benefit that I can think of, other than "shiny new technology", and is a waste of time and resources. I've heard some people suggest that putting an AI prompt into the terminal could be helpful for generating commands for difficult applications like FFMpeg, but you can also do the same thing by just asking ChatGPT in your browser and copying/pasting, which is what we've always done

b) More importantly, I absolutely do not want there to be any code in the terminal that writes commands for me or on my behalf. The command line is intimately connected to the OS and has access to every file, environment variable and socket on my system. iTerm just had to patch a bug where its URL handling and link previews was causing a remote code execution, so I would have expected this "feature" to cause security issues in the same way

Terminals are also just a fundamentally conservative application. Shiny new technology has never been a clean fit into terminals. Imagine if iTerm decided to integrate NFTs and crypto, or optionally link your Meta account so you can use your terminal in Virtual Reality, would probably draw a similar negative response.

Post reply on HN