alt Hacker NewsThat's not what I meant by political. I meant political in the more modern sense of "appealing to emotion rather than thought".
EDIT:
Everyone is rightfully calling me out that this doesn't make a lot of sense. What I meant is that the move is driven by ideology. I think there is a lot of overlap between politics and ideology, and an increasing amount of overlap between ideology and emotion. But it's fair enough to call me out here.
Replies
I can't see how this counts as "political" or "ideological" by your definition unless you believe that emotion can't exist as part of any decision, in which case you should give up interacting with human beings entirely.
Regardless, the decision was 99% logical. In fact, even the emotional parts are laudable. For example, I love software. That's an emotion. If you disagree with that foundation, we will fundamentally never be able to converse with each other about what's best for software.
Wait, expecting all code to be verified and tested by a human is not engineering-driven but instead emotion-driven mindset???
Whole OSS is driven by ideology. It does not exiat without ideology. And not just that, whole massive development companies are driven by ideologies.
OpenAI itself is a bundle of ideologies and pretend ideologies. Thw whole puah for AI and AIG is way more about emotions and ideology then about business ir engineering.
That has nothing to do with what "politics" means but it's exactly how people have started using "political" to mean "idea I don't agree with".
Humans have always appealed to emotion - as part of their logical process.
Fear (emotion) is used (advantageously) to force us to check that something isn't going to break us
In this instance fear is being used to ensure that yt-dlp is not exposed to (genuine) concerns about the quality of bun that is openly being built making use of tools we as a whole know is problematic.
I agree with you that the statements are a bit over the top (that's an emotional response to their statements btw) and that (eventually) you would /hope/ that bun gets to a point where it's got some genuine reliability from a users perspective.
Edit: I see your edit to explain that the issue is ideology - but unfortunately (perhaps) that's not an improved stance - ideology has to guide us when we just don't know - it's a heuristic.
That's a perfectly cromulent meaning of the word.
> I meant political in the more modern sense of "appealing to emotion rather than thought".
I'm not familiar with this definition in any modern or archaic sense. Is there somewhere I can read about it? Just because a decision is not directly engineering related (which I'm not even convinced this is) doesn't mean that it's not thoughtful.