EarlKing

35 ms·

451.
by EarlKing 4y ago
Yes, but then we might get the answer.
452.
by EarlKing 4y ago
For this particular implementation there shouldn't be since it is quite literally a disassembly of a product from the 1980s that was then translated to C. However, none of that matters as we're talking about copyright and the lite
453.
by EarlKing 4y ago
They would, yes, but obviously they're not very good about it. Everyone knows they're doing it, and on what basis, too, which rather defeats the purpose and clues people in that there is something about that message which is dange
454.
by EarlKing 4y ago
Worse than that it's Abandonware with extra steps. He tries to justify it by pointing to the FAIR USE Act which as I noted never passed. What's worse is that the amendments to the DMCA proposed in that act have nothing to do with
455.
by EarlKing 4y ago
Speaking from 30+ years being online in one form or another: That doesn't work. It has never worked. The public know censorship when they see it and correctly identify it as weakness. It doesn't silence dissent -- it encourages it
456.
by EarlKing 4y ago
This sure as hell ain't Hamlet, bub.
457.
by EarlKing 4y ago
You have to go back. (Sorry. Somebody had to do it.)
458.
by EarlKing 4y ago
Derivative work of a commercial product. Briefly mentions the FAIR USE Act of 2007, but that act never passed. Author is more or less banking on the fact that the company went bankrupt so who knows who owns the rights nowadays. Shouldn&#x27
459.
by EarlKing 4y ago
Expert systems will be welcomed right up until the point where they start making the legal profession look incompetent. Vide what happened with MYCIN in the medical community if you need a refresher course on how this is going to go down.
460.
by EarlKing 4y ago
Zitadel: Popping the competition! (Sponsored by Clearasil) Honestly, how does this name even remotely relate to what it does? Sometimes I really despise the trend towards "quirky" names in open source projects.
461.
by EarlKing 4y ago
No, but I am saying that you have essentially no control over that, but you do have control over your own person. Focus on the thing you can control rather than wasting your time arguing about the things you can't.
462.
by EarlKing 4y ago
...in which case exactly 1% of the population are unprivileged enough to not have family, friends, or choices. This is literally an excuse for people who don't want to even try.
463.
by EarlKing 4y ago
> Why are you making this personal? Why are you avoiding responsibility? You don't control the world. You only control yourself. Change the things you can change. > That's a very cruel way to look at the situation, when many
464.
by EarlKing 4y ago
> On whose shoulders does the lack of a good education about labour rights lie on? Doesn't matter. You only have control over one person: You. > Allowing big powerful corporations to beat up young individuals doesn't benefit
465.
by EarlKing 4y ago
ITT we learn that making intelligent decisions that require sacrifice is somehow "privilege"... but whining about making bad decisions isn't.
466.
by EarlKing 4y ago
Then don't work there, or do as I directed and leverage time there to get better work elsewhere. A company that is determined to treat people as "human resources" will not be deterred just because you complain. It will be det
467.
by EarlKing 4y ago
$40 and hour is still $40 and hour. Live like a Bohemian, pile up your cash for a year, two years, four years... and then bounce to something better. Learned helplessness and expecting a daddy to come along and fix everything for you is not
468.
by EarlKing 4y ago
That's exactly the word they're not looking for. They don't want to admit that they made poor life choices and paid for them. Once you hit the age of majority you're a functioning adult and you don't get to make exc
469.
by EarlKing 5y ago
No, it really wouldn't, since Twitter has a social/psychological problem, not a technological problem.
470.
by EarlKing 5y ago
It's actually not. Text mode doesn't mean you have to use an 8-bit code like Code Page 437. You could just as well use Unicode. It really just makes GP sound like they're looking for an excuse to be snarky and they just come
471.
by EarlKing 5y ago
Oooo. Now to see about hooking up my Alesis to this....
472.
by EarlKing 5y ago
Reread the second paragraph. We're in agreement.
473.
by EarlKing 5y ago
A bot would say that.
474.
by EarlKing 5y ago
"It's turtles all the way down." In the process of remembering that little tidibt it reminded me of a short story I read once that was circulated without attribution for a few decades, i.e. Terry Bissom's "They&#x27
475.
by EarlKing 5y ago
Exactly like the one we have now: A cacophonous cesspit filled with the mental diarrhea of a million bots sharting their opinions into the void in a desperate bid to either sway your opinion to their cause (whether commerce or politics), or
476.
by EarlKing 5y ago
How about lowering the data transfer prices going out to the internet? $0.09/GB is a joke (and in poor taste).
477.
by EarlKing 5y ago
Because that's not their job? From their perspective it's quite literally spamming up their index and impeding the intended use of the commons. Those images and all associated metadata should have been relocated to archive.org yea
478.
by EarlKing 5y ago
PENGUIN MONKEY TACO. That's all.
479.
by EarlKing 5y ago
It is political in the sense that the acceptance of definitions is a matter of politics, not logic. If you call your software "MIT licensed" there can very well be ambiguity by virtue of muddying the situation and getting enough p
480.
by EarlKing 5y ago
No, we really can't, because this is a political issue rather than an issue of logic. The term "freeware" had an unambiguous definition before the FSF came along and decided to co-opt the term for its personal crusade, just l

More ›