@jaypatelani also, for giggles, there's an extremist anti-AI site that describes NetBSD's AI policy as permissive.

I'll allow people to find their own way there.

@Imnebuddy

Thanks for asking, and for sharing your beliefs.

You were not previously blocked; you're not blocked now.

@Imnebuddy thanks, you're ahead of me in your thinking.

You're not blocked.

At my profile, I'm open about blocking.

Cc @SocialistVibes01

@halm thanks.

The Linuxiac headline is titillating, but false. Maybe based on disinformation.

It's fairly well-known that NetBSD has not banned AI-generated code.

I gained a balanced answer from Anthropic Claude a few weeks ago, to help tackle misinformation in Reddit. 2026-10-17:

https://claude.ai/share/a6b7b467-db4e-4c8c-972e-7c22d26b1d6a

Cc @onlooker

#NetBSD #AI #misinformation

https://claude.ai/share/a6b7b467-db4e-4c8c-972e-7c22d26b1d6a

@SocialistVibes01

https://lemmy.ml/instances shows beige.party as:

― linked
― not blocked.

For your Lemmy post, my beige.party view shows:

0 boosts · 0 quotes · 0 favourites

– clearly out of tune with the Lemmy view of its popularity.

My https://mastodon.social/@SocialistVibes01@lemmy.ml/117598276783857430 view of your post is more in tune (screenshot below).

I have a quiet idea about a possible explanation. I'll test something, then follow up, maybe later today.

In the meantime: from the logged-out Lemmy view of your Lemmy post, I see that Imnebuddy probably did see my comment about CoffeeBSD. That's a good thing, although it might negate the possible explanation (above).

Ah, the Mysteries of the Fediverse.

#Fediverse #Lemmy #Mastodon

@SocialistVibes01 OK, thanks. Maybe you can let Imnebuddy have this link:

https://www.reddit.com/r/freebsd/comments/1vryen7/coffeebsd/_an/_aifree/_fork/_of/_freebsd/

CoffeeBSD ― an AI-free fork of FreeBSD

@SocialistVibes01 I can't see any of the three previous replies in Mastodon, is that normal? A limitation of Lemmy, maybe?

In Lemmy (not logged in), I see a response from Imnebuddy less than thirty minutes ago.

https://beige.party/@Imnebuddy@lemmy.ml (logged in to Mastodon) shows nothing more recent than https://lemmy.ml/post/41935087 – ten months ago.

#Fediverse #Lemmy #Mastodon

https://lemmy.ml/post/41935087

@hucste thanks for sharing this. It's a good read, and I like that it says plainly that QEMU with KVM uses the same one-process-per-guest design.

The author acknowledges use of AI, so I used AI for what's below.

A few things that a Linux-leaning reader might push back on:

1. The headline numbers don't compare like with like. The table sets 46,709 lines of bhyve against 1,969,575 lines of QEMU across all targets, but QEMU is a multi-architecture emulator as well as a KVM front end. The post does give the x86 target (57,039 lines) and hw/ (644,480 lines), but only in the closing summary, not in the table people will screenshot.

2. The minimal-hypervisor idea is already common on Linux, and the post doesn't mention it. Firecracker, Cloud Hypervisor and crosvm all run on KVM and deliberately offer very few devices. Many Linux readers will probably think "so, Firecracker".

3. The post's own example works against its line-count argument. The October workaround shows that what matters is which devices a guest is given, not how much device code is compiled in. QEMU works the same way: a floppy controller the guest never sees can't be attacked. VENOM is a fair point from 2015, but you can configure that risk away rather than needing a smaller codebase.

4. Confinement on Linux is often on by default too. The post says bhyve usually runs as root and confines itself with Capsicum by default. On Linux, libvirt typically runs QEMU as an unprivileged user and confines it with SELinux or AppArmor (sVirt) on the major distributions. Capsicum's self-imposed design is admirable, but "on by default" isn't unique to FreeBSD.

5. Linux users tend to weigh the whole stack around the hypervisor: libvirt, Proxmox, OpenStack, live migration, GPU passthrough, nested virtualisation. The post measures tidiness, not the tools available around it. I haven't checked where bhyve stands on all of those today, but readers will ask.

@hucste thanks! Also:

https://www.reddit.com/r/freebsd/comments/1xo863i/realnas/_a/_freebsdnative/_management/_layer/_for/_zfs/

― as far as I can tell, RealNAS is the first fork of zVault.

#AI #fork #FreeBSD #NAS #TrueNAS #zVault

@bugbear begin with:

lsof

– targeting the mount point of the volume.

@hucste nice, I always like his writing.

The narrowness of the text column can make things unnecessarily difficult to read.

The screenshot here is referenced from discussion in LinkedIn, https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7514237399435169793/