> In theory I could use an old version of Hugo, but I have no idea when it broke, so how far do I go back?

Pretty sure the version of Hugo used to generate a site is included in metadata in the generated output.

If you have a copy of the site from when it last worked, then assuming my above memory is correct you should be able to get the exact version number from that. :)

When you say "AI maintained", what are you meaning?

The food/housing/etc bill for 108k Bob Ross er... PPU's seems like it would be fairly substantial too.

Hmmm, future video's might just "compress" down to a common AI model and a bunch of prompts + metadata about scene order. ;)

If you provide your own functions/tools to the AI agent, wouldn't that let you do exactly that?

ie "Here AI, call this function -> local_exec(commmand_name, {param1, param2, [etc]})" to execute functions.

And you'd wire up your local_exec() function to run the command in the container however you choose. (chroot, namespace, ssh to something remote, etc)

This will work fine for bash commands, but most Agent implementations also have read/write file functions that are implemented using local file operations.

Interestingly, the repo has a LICENSES folder that contains the text of the licenses used in the repo:

https://archive.softwareheritage.org/browse/directory/ed4b20...

And yep, they only included the most openly permissive ones there (APL2 and MIT), completely skipping everything else. Ugh.

Yeah, Rockchip seems to have screwed up badly but as per the GitHub DCMA notice:

https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2025/12/2025-12-1...

> ... the offending repository maintainers were informed of the problem almost 2 years ago ([private]), and did nothing to resolve it. Worse, their last comment ([private]) suggests they do not intend to resolve it at all.

Seems like the reporter gave them a lot of time to fix the problem, then when it because obvious (to them) that it was never going to be fixed they took an appropriate next step.

> animals are related to mushrooms

???

Apparently in very early evolution animals and fungi shared a common ancestor. That's a pretty far cry from "related to" as its generally used.

Slightly related as mushrooms are closer to animal than to plants, as anyone in a grocery store would guess.

> anyone in a grocery store would guess.

Actually, I'd challenge that particular point.

Mushrooms seem to be found in the fresh fruit and vegetables area, rather than in the deli (meat and cheese), so that would probably point more towards them being considered "vegetables". Or fruit. ;)

Yep, however one wishes to classify them botanically, mushrooms are a vegetable in culinary usage (similar to tomatoes in that way).

I agree. Sorry, bad English. "as" -> "in oposite of" (or something like that).

Any chance the problem with your promotion was someone above you taking credit for your work?

Isn't it Apple's policy to not support OSS projects, unless they're Apple's own OSS ones?

ie anything Apple didn't create/release themselves