I can't speak on everyones behalf and I am not just referencing Linux here, I am also referencing the great family of BSDs, but having the full source available as part of the install is what I'm all about. If that is _counter cultural_ then so be it, but it isn't the main intent. But having the source to the kernel, the OS, the apps I use, complete with stellar man pages and other manuals... I'm set.

From the article: >When an individual chooses to use a Linux-based operating system instead of Windows or OSX, they are, deliberately or not, making a statement. They are declaring themselves to be autonomous and independent.

But this is being reversed now and this has gradually been the case over the years. By just using linux are you capable of debugging the kernel? When the code itself grows unbounded in size and complexity, the moat grows more and more. Tomorrow if you had a nasty GPU driver bug or scheduler bug in any of these systems are you personally empowered to make that change? I would argue no. I've had this, I've tried trawling through the kernel to help some nerds debug why ppc64 KVM was not working when running in BE mode and it was completely intractable. I could just be an idiot though, the evaluation of that is left to the reader.

My point with referencing with LLMs is that this has turned this dial up to 11, now you have developers shipping a crap ton of code and complexity is growing more. The more the developers rely on this stuff the more there is this kind of implication that in order for you to keep up you will use it too. Is that carrying the spirit of the luddite?

Also FreeBSD is also taking LLM stuff, OpenBSD doesn't have a policy prohibiting this, NetBSD does.