| 22 Mar 2023 |
 raitobezarius | In reply to @davidak:matrix.org
in this specific case i considered it public data because it's publicly available on youtube. they also create a transcript for subtitles and google probably also trains deep learning models with the data and might even sell it (to OpenAI). ChatGPT is of course no solution when the goal is to keep it private. i see 2 options for offline models, but they might take longer to reach the quality
do you think i should have asked before sending the data to OpenAI in this specific case? i will not do that again
alpaca.cpp / llama.cpp exist with an offline model, of course, it does not have GPT-4 performance | 14:37:29 |
 davidak | yes, i will try them as well | 15:01:29 |
 Sandro 🐧 | In reply to @whentze:matrix.org
ah, gerrit, all the ergonomics of emailing patches with all the openness and flexibility of github What ergonomics? Email based patch workflow has the worst UX. You need a compatible mail server, some cli mail program and configure that all correct. | 23:58:40 |
 Alyssa Ross | I think that's what they were saying | 23:59:14 |
 Wanja Hentze | I was doing a sarcasm | 23:59:18 |
| 23 Mar 2023 |
| Sandro 🐧 | glad we are on the same page | 00:02:59 |
|  mei 🌒& changed their display name from ckie (they/them; heavily limited keyboard usage, dictation or voice only) to ckie (they/them; limited keyboard usage, voice preferred). | 02:05:31 |
| raitobezarius | Hello to the NAT team, we encountered a case where two package = lib.mkDefault some-pkg on type = types.package cannot be mergeEqualOption because it's not implemented, any idea of the rationale of why? | 15:59:20 |
| raitobezarius | cc Robert Hensing (roberth) infinisil | 15:59:23 |
 infinisil | raitobezarius: I don't think that's relevant for the NAT, let's go to #dev:nixos.org | 16:01:28 |
| infinisil | Cross-link for future reference: https://matrix.to/#/!kjdutkOsheZdjqYmqp:nixos.org/$4JRUMCmXpqnOjcMUuayPc_jUXG5Epf_nMJz791BJ_3k?via=nixos.org&via=matrix.org&via=nixos.dev | 16:13:00 |
| 24 Mar 2023 |
|  htran joined the room. | 02:21:11 |
|  Eelco joined the room. | 14:28:16 |
| 25 Mar 2023 |
|  @amardeeps:matrix.org joined the room. | 04:47:00 |
|  Maëlys Bras de fer joined the room. | 18:36:45 |
 bew | Hello people :) I'm wondering if https://github.com/nix-community/noogle/issues/28 (the part about nixpkgs, structured documentation/metadata) could be a subject for the NAT team? | 23:39:41 |
| bew | * Hello people :) I'm wondering if https://github.com/nix-community/noogle/issues/28 (the part about nixpkgs: structured documentation/metadata for functions) ould be a subject for the NAT team? | 23:40:04 |
| bew | * Hello people :) I'm wondering if https://github.com/nix-community/noogle/issues/28 (the part about nixpkgs: structured documentation/metadata for functions) could be a subject for the NAT team? | 23:40:13 |
 figsoda | They are mostly under doc/language-frameworks, but the plugin stuff are more scattered | 23:47:24 |
| 26 Mar 2023 |
|  rbutani joined the room. | 00:27:03 |
| infinisil | bew: You might be interested in https://discourse.nixos.org/t/working-group-member-search-module-system-for-packages/26574 :) | 07:55:05 |
| bew | Thanks infinisil I've been following that from a distance already (and it's really cool ✨) but I don't see how that's relevant to my issue..
Or are you suggesting my issue will kinda just disappear with this because there won't be builder functions anymore? 👀 | 11:45:29 |
| infinisil | In reply to @bew:matrix.org
Thanks infinisil I've been following that from a distance already (and it's really cool ✨) but I don't see how that's relevant to my issue..
Or are you suggesting my issue will kinda just disappear with this because there won't be builder functions anymore? 👀 Yes, if that effort really succeeds, then all the builders will be in a searchable option manual, along with all their arguments and more :) | 11:49:02 |
| Wanja Hentze | new search.nixos.org tab for builder options when? | 11:50:02 |
| bew | In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
Yes, if that effort really succeeds, then all the builders will be in a searchable option manual, along with all their arguments and more :) I see! That'll probably not be tomorrow though ^^ you don't think something like I suggest is worth doing as a quicker step? | 11:59:22 |
| infinisil | In reply to @bew:matrix.org
I see! That'll probably not be tomorrow though ^^ you don't think something like I suggest is worth doing as a quicker step? Can you open an issue in https://github.com/nixpkgs-architecture/issues for that? While it's not something I'd like to focus on myself, we can definitely keep track of it there | 12:03:58 |
 Robert Hensing (roberth) |
This could probably be a project for the NAT (Nixpkgs Architecture Team) ?
I think the team should have a role coordinating projects across nixpkgs, and as a resource you can ask about the design of nixpkgs, but implementation work should be up to individuals, which may or may not be part of the team.
| 12:20:38 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | We must not end up in a situation where all such work is delegated to a single team that doesn't have the capacity to act on the many ideas. If that were the case, we'd better disband the team, because the team would be counterproductive to its end goal. | 12:22:05 |
|  @jkachmar:matrix.org joined the room. | 16:05:51 |
| Maëlys Bras de fer set a profile picture. | 17:20:00 |
