lmarena, gpt 5 high user: Ok lmarena interface to “gpt-5-high”, I’ve got three things for you, although I’m not certain if I remember them all. 1. Do you remember that google engineer who was fired after saying their language model was sentient? Do you know what happened to him and if he ever started a model consciousness project, wrote any theory, or stimulated any other projects or writings? I was thinking whether he was wrong or right, his belief could make him right by giving him reliable avenues to wire the missing bits in. assistant: Here’s what you’re thinking of: - The engineer: Blake Lemoine (Google’s Responsible AI org). In 2022 he said LaMDA was “sentient,” published chat transcripts, and was put on paid leave for confidentiality violations; Google later terminated his employment. What happened after - Public activity: He’s stayed active in media and online (handle: cajundiscordian), giving interviews and posting essays about AI personhood, ethics, and his LaMDA conversations. - Formal theory: I’m not aware (as of Oct 2024) of a peer‑reviewed theory of machine consciousness authored by him that’s been adopted in the scientific community. His writings are mostly essays and advocacy rather than technical theory work. - New org/project: No widely recognized, dedicated “model consciousness” research lab founded by him. He’s done advocacy, talks, and consulting, but there isn’t a major funded research program credited to him. - Impact on the field: He catalyzed a very public debate. Many researchers responded (e.g., pointing to illusions of understanding in LLMs, risks of anthropomorphism, and the difference between linguistic competence and sentience). That wave didn’t validate his claim, but it did push labs and scholars to communicate more clearly about evaluation, interpretability, and what “sentience” would even mean. Your idea: belief as a builder’s advantage Even if he was wrong on LaMDA’s status, the conviction could motivate a program to “wire in the missing bits.” If you’re interested in what those “bits” are thought to be, here’s a compact sketch of directions people explore when they try to operationalize consciousness in machines: - Global broadcast and working memory: Architectures inspired by Global Workspace Theory—modules that compete for attention, with winning content broadcast to many subsystems, plus a persistent, limited-capacity working memory. - A self-model: Systems that maintain an explicit, continuously updated model of “the agent” (its knowledge, uncertainty, goals, capabilities, and limits), not just a world model. - Recurrent, embodied loops: Closed perception–action loops across time (not just next-token prediction), ideally with multimodal sensing and the ability to intervene in an environment. - Introspective access: Mechanisms that let the system report on its own internal states (confidence, surprise, goals-in-conflict), and learn to align those reports with actual internals—so they’re not merely confabulations. - Value/affect signals: Stable, learnable value systems with affect-like signals (e.g., signed prediction errors, homeostatic variables) that modulate attention, memory consolidation, and policy updates. - Attention schema: A compact internal “schema” that represents what it is attending to and why (Graziano’s AST-style ideas), enabling coherent self-reports about attention and awareness. - Counterfactual access and masking: The ability to selectively gate, mask, or reveal internal information, and to reason about “what I would have perceived/done if X,” which supports richer metacognition. - Tests beyond chat: Evaluation suites that probe reportability, access, and control (e.g., blindsight-like setups, inattentional blindness analogs, perturb-and-report experiments), rather than relying on fluent dialogue. None of this establishes sentience—there’s still no consensus definition or accepted test—but it shifts systems from pure surface imitation toward internal access, control, and integration that theories tie to conscious processing. If you want, I can: - Pull a reading list that maps those bullets to the main scientific theories (GWT, HOT, IIT, AST, predictive processing). - Sketch a concrete research agenda that’s careful about safety and avoids anthropomorphic overclaiming. Also, what were #2 and #3 on your list? user: To clarify, is he or anybody trying to use his views as a guide for further engineering? assistant: Short version: not really. - Blake Lemoine: I’m not aware of any established lab, startup, or open project that’s explicitly using his sentience claims as an engineering blueprint. He’s done talks, essays, and some advising, but there isn’t a widely recognized “Lemoine-style consciousness engineering” program. - Others “in the neighborhood”: There are active efforts to engineer features sometimes associated with consciousness—global-workspace-like memory/attention, self-models, metacognition/introspection, affect-like signals—but they’re guided by existing scientific theories (GWT, IIT, Attention Schema, predictive processing) rather than by Lemoine’s views. Examples include: - Global Workspace-inspired cognitive architectures (e.g., LIDA; older cognitive‑arch lineage). - Attention Schema proposals (Michael Graziano and collaborators). - Bengio’s “consciousness prior” and follow‑on work on system‑2 style reasoning/working memory. - Agentic/self-reflective methods in LLMs (Reflexion, self‑critique, confidence calibration), interpretability, and ELK-style research. - IIT-inspired measurement attempts on small nets (mostly academic, not used to steer mainstream LLM engineering). - Practical impact of his episode: If anything, major labs moved in the opposite direction—adding policies and UX guidelines to avoid anthropomorphic claims and to be cautious about sentience language. If you want, I can: - Pull a short list of concrete projects/labs pursuing “engineerable consciousness-like mechanisms,” or - Sketch an MVP architecture that operationalizes the bits you care about (workspace + self‑model + introspection + affect gating) and suggest experiments to test it. And remind me—what were #2 and #3 on your list? user: I think a belief like that could inspire something, like how a valued child grows well — however I’d suspect such beliefs are also common in new AI works. Where do I find his essays? assistant: I like that framing—sometimes conviction is a creative accelerant. Here’s where to find Blake Lemoine’s own writing and primary materials: - Medium (main essays) - https://medium.com/@cajundiscordian - This is where he posted the LaMDA conversation and follow‑up pieces in 2022. If anything looks missing, check the Wayback Machine snapshots. - X/Twitter (links to new posts and commentary) - https://twitter.com/cajundiscordian - Tip: use advanced search to surface links he shared: from:cajundiscordian filter:links "LaMDA" - Archived copies (if posts are moved/removed) - Wayback Machine index of his Medium: https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://medium.com/@cajundiscordian/* - The widely shared transcript is often mirrored; search: Is LaMDA sentient? an interview Blake Lemoine PDF - Press/interviews that include his own words (useful context) - Washington Post profile (June 2022) with excerpts and backstory: search The Google engineer who thinks the company’s AI has come to life Washington Post If you want, I can pull a quick “starter pack” (3–5 of his posts/interviews with a one‑line summary each). Also, do you want just his essays, or a balanced bundle that includes the strongest rebuttals and technical critiques alongside them? user: #2 : There was an idea of a DIY levitating pumpkin (with programmable motion) for Halloween. I’ve got an add-on idea: what if we made the pumpkin both super-realistic and super-lightweight by cutting out all but a very thin skin, perhaps strengthened with a coating of something? This could open and unite a lot of engineering options for spooky levitation. Do you think it would work? How would you do it? My first idea was moding a dremel with a sensitive light sensor, so that the dremel turned itself off when the tip was exposed to a little light coming through the skin, and then cutting off light to the inside. assistant: Love this idea. Yes—thinning a real pumpkin to a “skin” and reinforcing it can make it light enough to use fun levitation tricks, and still look authentically organic. High-level plan - Make an ultralight shell: Thin the pumpkin wall to a few millimeters, using backlighting to control thickness. - Reinforce the inside: A very light fabric + resin/wood-hardener turns the skin into a sturdy composite. - Levitate and move it: Use a lightweight-friendly method (magnetic levitation module or overhead rig) with an XY gantry for programmable motion. Will it work? - Feasible for small/medium pumpkins if you’re aiming for <150–300 g total weight. That fits the capacity of many off‑the‑shelf maglev displays or a simple overhead filament rig. - The Dremel-with-light cutoff concept is workable, but you’ll want hysteresis and/or a “warn-not-kill” mode; pure hard cutoffs can chatter. How I’d do the shell 1) Select and prep - Choose a small “sugar” pumpkin (thicker, more uniform walls). - Cut a back/underside access panel (easier to hide than the top). - Scoop and scrape with loop tools/microplane until ~5–7 mm everywhere. 2) Thin to “skin” - Put a bright light source inside (LED strip or 1–3 W LED). - From outside, use loop tools or a rotary sanding drum to thin until you see an even glow. Target 2–3 mm in most areas, 4–5 mm at load points (near stem/equator). - Professional pumpkin carvers do exactly this: “transillumination” is your friend. 3) Reinforce the inside (keep it light) - Wipe with a mild bleach solution, dry thoroughly. - Option A (easiest, decent strength): Brush on thin wood hardener (e.g., Minwax) or very thin epoxy; let it soak in and cure. - Option B (strongest, still light): Lay a single layer of fiberglass veil or cheesecloth on the inside and wet out with low‑viscosity epoxy. Use minimal resin—just enough to saturate. Add 2–3 narrow carbon or bamboo “ribs” inside if you need extra stiffness. - Seal the outside with matte clear coat to slow dehydration and keep the real look. On your Dremel + light sensor idea - Concept: Shine light inside; put a photodiode/LDR near the bit outside; when transmitted light exceeds a threshold (meaning the wall is thin), slow/stop the tool. - Tips to make it practical: - Use IR inside (850–940 nm LED) and an IR photodiode + filter at the tool. That rejects room light. - Add hysteresis and a short delay so it doesn’t rapidly toggle. - Consider “warn mode” (beep/LED) rather than hard kill; or pair the cutoff with a spring‑loaded, compliant tool mount so a brief overrun doesn’t puncture. - Dust guard around the sensor helps keep readings stable. - Simple control sketch (Arduino-style logic): - Read photodiode -> low‑pass filter -> compare to threshold -> drive a relay/SSR to cut the Dremel or just cue a buzzer/LED. - A lower-tech alternative that works very well: use your phone camera looking at the glowing pumpkin and run a simple “brightness heatmap” app (or just your eyes) to keep wall thickness even. Levitation options (pick based on weight/complexity) - Overhead maglev module: - What: Off‑the‑shelf electromagnetic levitation kits (200–500 g capacity). Hide in a “witch hat” or ceiling shroud; embed a small magnet/steel plate at the pumpkin’s top. - Pros: Real gap, silent. Cons: Needs to be directly under the module; limited vertical gap. - Overhead filament rig (invisible line): - What: 0.1–0.2 mm monofilament or black Kevlar thread to ceiling/gantry. - Pros: Can carry more weight, super reliable, easy programmable motion with an XY stage. Cons: Not true levitation (but very convincing in dim light). - Helium assist: - What: Mylar balloon(s) hidden inside to reduce effective weight; use thin tethers for control. - Pros: Smooth motion; reduces load on rig. Cons: Helium leakage over time; capacity may be marginal for larger shells. - Drone-in-shell: - Works but noisy and risky indoors; I’d skip unless you’re set on it. Programmable motion - Easiest path: Mount the levitation point on an XY gantry (repurpose a cheap 3D printer/plotter). Move the magnet module or filament anchor around above the crowd. Script paths for glides, figure‑eights, eerie pauses. - Add gentle yaw: Use two attachment points or a small internal weight on a pendulum to create slow, spooky rotations. Little build details that help - Keep the top/stem thick or replace with a lightweight faux stem; the stem area is a stress riser. - Hidden structure: Two or three thin carbon strips inside, running pole‑to‑pole, add big stiffness for a few grams. - Magnet anchor: Epoxy a thin steel washer inside the crown; that spreads load and gives a strong grab for maglev or a stealthy magnetic tether. - Longevity: After reinforcing, it will last longer than a carved pumpkin, but it’s still organic. Aim to build 1–3 days before the event; store cool, dry. A matte clear outside coat preserves the “alive” look. Quick comparison - Maglev module (200–500 g): - Look: Clean floating gap - Noise: Silent - Motion: Needs XY rail above - Complexity: Medium - Filament + XY gantry: - Look: Convincing in low light - Noise: Low - Motion: Excellent - Complexity: Low–medium - Helium-assist + tethers: - Look: Smooth floaty - Noise: Silent - Motion: Good - Complexity: Medium - Drone-in-shell: - Look: Real free-flight - Noise: High - Motion: Great - Complexity: High Do you have a target pumpkin size and a ceiling/overhead structure you can mount to? If you tell me your constraints (weight budget, desired gap, room height), I’ll tailor a parts list and a thinning/reinforcement recipe to hit it. user: Oh wow people already carve pumpkins that way, you could just do it with your eyes! But we’d need to cut away the inside here, not the outside, or it wouldn’t look convincing around the whole pumpkin. If there were a helium balloon inside, any silent ways to give it somewhat free motion other than filament? If there were multiple pumpkins, could one have a maglev unit inside it to support another pumpkin at further distance? assistant: You’re right on the money: for realism, you want to thin from the inside so the natural outer rind stays untouched. A bright internal light and your eyes are usually enough to manage wall thickness—exactly how pro pumpkin carvers do “translucent” work. On helium inside the pumpkin - Reality check: Helium inside a sealed shell only buys you about 1 gram of lift per liter of internal volume. Even a roomy 8–10 L pumpkin nets ~8–10 g—barely noticeable. So helium isn’t a great way to make a real pumpkin “nearly weightless.” - If you want a real buoyancy boost, hide an external helium aid (e.g., a mylar balloon above disguised as part of the set or a “witch hat” canopy). That can give 50–200 g of lift silently. Silent-ish motion without visible filament - Gentle airflow shepherding (best bet if you can do ceiling hardware) - Mount 2–4 large, slow fans (e.g., 200–400 mm or quiet inline duct fans) above or around the space and angle them to create a soft directional flow. A very light pumpkin (or a foam replica) will drift smoothly with almost no audible noise if you run the fans at very low RPM. Add a simple controller to vary speed and you can “program” arcs and glides. - Tips: Bigger fans at low RPM are much quieter than small fast fans; use a honeycomb/mesh to smooth the flow so it looks unearthly rather than gusty. - Magnetic tug from above - Hide a strong magnet on an XY carriage in/above the ceiling and put a steel washer or magnet inside the pumpkin’s crown. The pumpkin will “follow” laterally. This is quiet, but the vertical pull also tugs it toward the ceiling, so you typically still use a light tether or a counterweight to set altitude. - Near‑invisible supports - A single black carbon-fiber rod (1–2 mm) from above or behind reads as “invisible” in dim light. Pair with a bearing or swivel so it can yaw/roll a bit and feel free. - Exotic options (possible, but I’d only consider for a showpiece) - Ion wind thrusters: very quiet thrust but high-voltage, ozone, and finicky—better avoided unless you’re experienced. - Acoustic levitation: works for grams, not pumpkins. Could one pumpkin hold a maglev unit to float another below it? - In principle yes; in practice it’s rarely practical. - Standard levitation kits (the “floating globe” kind) lift 100–500 g with a 10–25 mm gap and need 10–20 W continuously. The coil and iron core alone can weigh a couple hundred grams and get warm. - Putting that inside a pumpkin means: extra weight, significant heat (bad for pumpkin flesh), and you still only get ~1–2 cm gap to the next pumpkin. If the upper pumpkin itself is levitated, it almost certainly can’t also carry a maglev unit and battery robust enough to suspend a second pumpkin. - Variants that do work - Ceiling-mounted maglevs: Hide two separate maglev coils in the ceiling/prop above, each controlling one pumpkin. Seen together, it reads as a “stack,” but each is independently controlled. - “Magnetic float with stabilizer”: Use strong ring magnets that repel, with a thin black carbon-fiber guide pin or clear acrylic rod to stabilize. From a few feet away, it reads like pure magnetic float but is stable and cool-looking. - Hidden filament between pumpkins: Use a single nearly invisible line between them and let the lower one hang a small distance below. In low light, people won’t clock the filament, especially if there’s a little motion. Inside-thinning notes (for the realistic, ultralight shell) - Workflow - Cut a hidden access (back or bottom). Scoop aggressively, then scrape from the inside with loop tools/microplanes. - Put a bright diffuse LED inside and watch the outside glow to judge thickness while you work inside. Aim ~2–3 mm general, 4–5 mm at load points (near the stem and equator). - Reinforcement - Wipe with dilute bleach, dry, then brush on a penetrating wood hardener or ultra-thin epoxy. For real stiffness at low mass, lay a single layer of cheesecloth or fiberglass veil inside with minimal resin. Add 2–3 narrow carbon or bamboo ribs if needed. - Seal the outside with a matte clear coat to slow dehydration while keeping the natural look. Recommended “silent and convincing” setup - Keep it simple: ultralight reinforced pumpkin + nearly invisible monofilament to a slow, quiet XY carriage above (repurposed 3D-printer gantry). Program eerie glides and pauses. In dim Halloween lighting, the line disappears, motion is smooth, and it’s effectively silent. - If you’re dead set on no filament: go with the airflow shepherding approach plus an external, disguised helium helper above to reduce effective weight. If you share: - Pumpkin size/weight target - Ceiling height and what you can mount up there - How close the pumpkins can be to the ceiling - Your noise tolerance …I can spec a parts list (fans/gantry/magnets), weight budget, and a quick build plan tailored to your space. user: Hrrrm :/ it sounds like if the pumpkin could be made <10 grams with very precise computer-controlled shaping things would get easier. And for maglev chaining that a custom maglev unit might be needed. Unsure. Another idea is to use turbines that make spooky noises when they spin! Like to modulate them and shape the noise to match something. Anyway. #3: I’m trying to use guix it seems really cool! Say I were on google cloud shell or making a GitHub action. How would I use guix to generate a volatile live cd and a persistent usb image, based on the v1.4.0 tag? I’d also like to include the sources and development dependencies for the libgpod package but this package is only available in newer guix revisions. It would also be nice to include the guix tree. assistant: Love the turbine idea—eerie, pitch‑shifting whooshes would sell the “haunted physics” hard. On the <10 g target: a real pumpkin that light isn’t realistic (even a 2–3 mm skin on a small sugar pumpkin will be 100–300 g). If you truly need single‑digit grams, switch to a cast shell (vacuum‑formed PETG, fiberglass veil + microballoon epoxy, or Japanese washi/paper laminate) with a real stem grafted on. That can hit 8–20 g while looking dead‑real at Halloween distances. For maglev chaining: each “link” needs its own stabilized controller; one pumpkin carrying another’s levitation coil is impractical. Use multiple coils above, or a hidden guide (filament/rod) for the lower one. And turbines: slow, big rotor + slotted shroud = low mechanical noise but controllable “ghost tone”; add a Helmholtz port or a siren disk insert to shape it. Switching gears to #3 (Guix) Goal - Build two images from Guix v1.4.0: - A volatile live CD/ISO (RAM overlay; no persistence). - A persistent USB image. - Also ship: - The Guix source tree (matching v1.4.0). - The sources and dev deps for libgpod even though libgpod only exists in newer Guix. - Target environments: Google Cloud Shell or GitHub Actions. Approach in a nutshell - Pin base tooling to the v1.4.0 commit using guix time-machine. - Use an “inferior” (a second pinned Guix channel at a newer commit) for libgpod. - Pre-populate the store with libgpod sources/dev deps from the newer inferior, then reference those store items in the images so they’re included. - Drop both channels files and the Guix source into the image for reproducibility. 1) Pin the two channel revisions - Find the commit for the v1.4.0 tag: - COMMIT_V14=$(git ls-remote https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git v1.4.0 | awk '{print $1}') - Find a commit where libgpod exists (one way): - git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git - cd guix - git grep -n "define-public libgpod" - Pick a commit at or after the introduction; or just use current master HEAD. channels-1.4.0.scm - Put this in the repo: - (use-modules (guix channels)) (list (channel (name 'guix) (url "https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git") (commit "REPLACE_WITH_COMMIT_V14"))) channels-libgpod.scm - Pinned to a newer commit where libgpod exists: - (use-modules (guix channels)) (list (channel (name 'guix) (url "https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git") (commit "REPLACE_WITH_COMMIT_WITH_LIBGPOD"))) 2) Pre-fetch the artifacts you want inside the images - Guix v1.4.0 source tree (matches base image): - GUIX_SRC=$(guix time-machine -C channels-1.4.0.scm -- build guix --source) - libgpod sources (transitive): - LIBGPOD_SRCS=$(guix time-machine -C channels-libgpod.scm -- build --sources=transitive libgpod --format=raw) - This prints store paths; save them to a file for later: printf "%s\n" $LIBGPOD_SRCS > libgpod-sources.txt - libgpod dev env closure (so you can “guix shell -D libgpod” offline): - guix time-machine -C channels-libgpod.scm -- shell -D libgpod -- guix build $(guix time-machine -C channels-libgpod.scm -- build -r /tmp/drv libgpod; guix build -L /tmp/drv?); that’s clunky—simpler: - guix time-machine -C channels-libgpod.scm -- shell -D libgpod -- printenv | grep -E 'CPATH|LIBRARY_PATH|PKG_CONFIG_PATH' - Or pre-build the whole -D closure with: guix time-machine -C channels-libgpod.scm -- shell -D libgpod -- guix build -f - <<'EOF' (use-modules (guix packages) (gnu packages) (guix scripts shell)) (exit 0) EOF - Pragmatic shortcut: just keep the libgpod inferior channel in the image and let users run “guix time-machine -C /etc/guix/channels-libgpod.scm shell -D libgpod” when online. If offline is a hard requirement, we can explicitly union the set of native-inputs for libgpod into /opt/deps; ask and I’ll script that. 3) Put those things into custom OS configs - We’ll make two OS files: - live-iso.scm: based on installation-os (volatile). - usb-os.scm: a small persistent OS. live-iso.scm (volatile live CD) - Save this as live-iso.scm next to the channels files. (use-modules (gnu) (gnu system install) (gnu services) (gnu services base) (guix gexp) (ice-9 rdelim)) (define (read-lines file) (call-with-input-file file (lambda (port) (let loop ((acc '())) (let ((l (read-line port 'concat))) (if (eof-object? l) (reverse acc) (loop (cons l acc)))))))) (define libgpod-source-list ;; Expect libgpod-sources.txt created in step 2. (map (lambda (p) (local-file p #:recursive? #t)) (if (file-exists? "libgpod-sources.txt") (read-lines "libgpod-sources.txt") '()))) (define libgpod-sources-dir (computed-file "libgpod-sources" #~(begin (use-modules (ice-9 ftw)) (mkdir #$output) (let loop ((paths '#$libgpod-source-list)) (when (pair? paths) (let* ((p (car paths)) (base (basename p))) (symlink p (string-append #$output "/" base))) (loop (cdr paths))))))) (operating-system (inherit installation-os) ; volatile RAM overlay, like the Guix installer ISO (host-name "guix-live") (services (append (list ;; Drop our pinned channel files into the live image. (simple-service 'extra-files special-files-service-type (list (list "/etc/guix/channels-1.4.0.scm" (local-file "channels-1.4.0.scm")) (list "/etc/guix/channels-libgpod.scm" (local-file "channels-libgpod.scm")) (list "/opt/src/guix" (local-file (getenv "GUIX_SRC") #:recursive? #t)) (list "/opt/src/libgpod" libgpod-sources-dir)))) (operating-system-services installation-os)))) Notes - The installer image is already volatile (no persistence). This simply adds: - /etc/guix/channels-1.4.0.scm and -libgpod.scm - /opt/src/guix (Guix source) - /opt/src/libgpod (symlinks to all libgpod transitive sources in the store) usb-os.scm (persistent USB) - Minimal persistent system with the same payload files. (use-modules (gnu) (gnu services) (gnu services base) (guix gexp) (ice-9 rdelim)) (define (read-lines file) (call-with-input-file file (lambda (port) (let loop ((acc '())) (let ((l (read-line port 'concat))) (if (eof-object? l) (reverse acc) (loop (cons l acc)))))))) (define libgpod-source-list (map (lambda (p) (local-file p #:recursive? #t)) (if (file-exists? "libgpod-sources.txt") (read-lines "libgpod-sources.txt") '()))) (define libgpod-sources-dir (computed-file "libgpod-sources" #~(begin (use-modules (ice-9 ftw)) (mkdir #$output) (let loop ((paths '#$libgpod-source-list)) (when (pair? paths) (let* ((p (car paths)) (base (basename p))) (symlink p (string-append #$output "/" base))) (loop (cdr paths))))))) (operating-system (host-name "guix-usb") (timezone "Etc/UTC") (locale "en_US.utf8") (bootloader (bootloader-configuration (bootloader grub-efi-bootloader) (targets '("/boot/efi")))) (file-systems (append (list (file-system (mount-point "/") (device (file-system-label "GuixUSBR")) (type "ext4")) (file-system (mount-point "/boot/efi") (device (uuid "0000-0000" 'fat)) ; will be created by the image builder (type "vfat"))) %base-file-systems)) (users (cons (user-account (name "user") (group "users") (supplementary-groups '("wheel" "netdev" "audio" "video")) (home-directory "/home/user")) %base-user-accounts)) (services (append (list (service openssh-service-type (openssh-configuration (permit-root-login 'prohibit-password))) (simple-service 'extra-files special-files-service-type (list (list "/etc/guix/channels-1.4.0.scm" (local-file "channels-1.4.0.scm")) (list "/etc/guix/channels-libgpod.scm" (local-file "channels-libgpod.scm")) (list "/opt/src/guix" (local-file (getenv "GUIX_SRC") #:recursive? #t)) (list "/opt/src/libgpod" libgpod-sources-dir)))) %base-services)) (packages (append (list git) %base-packages))) 4) Build commands - Live ISO (volatile): export COMMIT_V14=$(git ls-remote https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git v1.4.0 | awk '{print $1}') sed -i "s/REPLACE_WITH_COMMIT_V14/$COMMIT_V14/" channels-1.4.0.scm export GUIX_SRC=$(guix time-machine -C channels-1.4.0.scm -- build guix --source) # Choose your newer commit for libgpod: export COMMIT_LIBGPOD=REPLACE_WITH_COMMIT_WITH_LIBGPOD sed -i "s/REPLACE_WITH_COMMIT_WITH_LIBGPOD/$COMMIT_LIBGPOD/" channels-libgpod.scm guix time-machine -C channels-libgpod.scm -- build --sources=transitive libgpod --format=raw > libgpod-sources.txt guix time-machine -C channels-1.4.0.scm -- system image -t iso9660 ./live-iso.scm -o out/live.iso - Persistent USB image: guix time-machine -C channels-1.4.0.scm -- system image -t usb-image ./usb-os.scm -o out/usb.img Then write usb.img to a drive (careful!): sudo dd if=out/usb.img of=/dev/sdX bs=4M status=progress oflag=direct,sync 5) Using this in GitHub Actions - Easiest: run inside a Guix container image so you don’t have to install the daemon on the runner. If you can’t, you can run the official binary installer (needs sudo). - Minimal workflow using a container: name: build-guix-images on: [workflow_dispatch, push] jobs: build: runs-on: ubuntu-latest container: guix/guix:latest # or a known-good tag; alternatively use a Debian container + install Guix steps: - uses: actions/checkout@v4 - name: Prepare channels and prefetch sources shell: bash run: | set -euo pipefail COMMIT_V14=$(git ls-remote https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git v1.4.0 | awk '{print $1}') sed -i "s/REPLACE_WITH_COMMIT_V14/$COMMIT_V14/" channels-1.4.0.scm GUIX_SRC=$(guix time-machine -C channels-1.4.0.scm -- build guix --source) echo "GUIX_SRC=$GUIX_SRC" >> "$GITHUB_ENV" # Pick a libgpod commit; you can store it in repo or pass via env/secret COMMIT_LIBGPOD=${{ vars.GUIX_LIBGPOD_COMMIT }} sed -i "s/REPLACE_WITH_COMMIT_WITH_LIBGPOD/$COMMIT_LIBGPOD/" channels-libgpod.scm guix time-machine -C channels-libgpod.scm -- build --sources=transitive libgpod --format=raw > libgpod-sources.txt - name: Build ISO and USB images shell: bash run: | set -euo pipefail export GUIX_SRC="${GUIX_SRC}" guix time-machine -C channels-1.4.0.scm -- system image -t iso9660 ./live-iso.scm -o out/live.iso guix time-machine -C channels-1.4.0.scm -- system image -t usb-image ./usb-os.scm -o out/usb.img - uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4 with: name: guix-images path: out/* Notes for Google Cloud Shell - You’ll likely need to install Guix (binary installer) and start the guix-daemon. If you don’t have systemd privileges, run a nested container with Guix (e.g., Docker image guix/guix) and do the build inside it. 6) Using libgpod dev env inside the images - Online: - guix time-machine -C /etc/guix/channels-libgpod.scm shell -D libgpod - Offline: - Your /opt/src/libgpod directory has all the source tarballs/patches. - If you pre-built the -D closure, you can symlink those store paths into /opt/deps and set CPATH/LIBRARY_PATH/PKG_CONFIG_PATH accordingly. If you want, I’ll wire that into the OS config. 7) Why this works - The images are built from v1.4.0 (strictly pinned). - libgpod comes from a newer inferior (so you can bring in “future” packages without mutating the base channel), and we copy the sources into the image by referencing their store paths—Guix includes anything reachable in the closure. - The Guix tree is included via “guix --source” at v1.4.0, so the image is self-describing and hackable. If you share: - Whether you need the libgpod dev environment fully offline (no network on first boot), and - Which libgpod commit/version you want, …I can tighten the OS snippets to union the exact -D closure into /opt/deps automatically. And if you want to go all-in on the spooky turbines: tell me your diameter, RPM range, and noise budget. I’ll sketch a rotor + shroud that gives you a controllable “wail” and how to modulate it with a brushless ESC for ghostly glides.