Tell-tale signs: fluffs up the "key features for x". Each feature follows bold title, highly generic explanation of the title. Then it lists some examples, all following the same pattern "why x".
Then the conclusion is full of gpt-isms. Doesn't say anything of value, just re-iterates fluff words.
> NetBSD's presence in space demonstrates how a well-designed, community-supported operating system can play a pivotal role in advancing space exploration and technology. As satellite missions grow more ambitious, NetBSD’s adaptability ensures it will remain a key player in the evolving field of aerospace engineering.
I know there's a policy encouraging users not to cry "llm generated" every time, but this is quite egregious.
There is? If so, it should be reversed and LLM-generated crap should be banned.
The article lists out some examples which I found interesting and didn't know about. I tried getting Gemini to reproduce them but it just gave general examples. Now without those examples it'd be a boring listicle.
Also I haven't seen an LLM spit out a classic sentence like: "This text explores the reasons behind its adoption and how it powers these satellites."
At least give us some history about who decided on NetBSD, when, and why they picked it without the generic blah blah.
Also, for embedded devices the coherent whole system design of *BSDs with the package builder seems like it'd be much nicer than BuildRoot or Yocto.
I've come to very much dislike trying to keep Linux images for embedded stuff running over years. Perhaps it's because Linux claims not pride itself on "not breaking userspace" but seems to add a new GPIO sub-system every 5 years. Ain't nobody got time for that.
Interesting question but can't find much about it [0]
I guess for the most recent ESP32 it will be under RISC-V.
People have been able to boot Linux on them for a while so why not...
RISC-V support might be an option.
posix86•2h ago
AndrewDucker•2h ago
netsharc•2h ago
posix86•15m ago