commoner

16 ms·

121.
by commoner 3y ago
In your example, the launcher would be open source but the blob would not. When you look at the proportions of the code in the combined software, it would be obvious that the majority of the code is proprietary and that the software as a wh
122.
by commoner 3y ago
Not really. People commonly misuse "their", "there", and "they're", but doesn't change the currently accepted definitions of these words. The OSI's Open Source Definition gains credibility from i
123.
by commoner 3y ago
> You can run the software with AGPL. You simply need to contribute it back to the main project. Close, but not quite! Under the AGPL, you only need to make the source code available to the people who interact with the software over a co
124.
by commoner 3y ago
Wouldn't "visible source" be exactly the same thing as "source-available"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source-available_software
125.
by commoner 3y ago
Piped is a great web-based service, but since tvOS does not support web browsers on the Apple TV, to block YouTube ads, you either have to stream Piped videos to the Apple TV from another Apple device using AirPlay screen mirroring or use a
126.
by commoner 3y ago
Thank you for this recommendation. I was looking for a FOSS replacement for n8n with a similar user interface and feature set, and Activepieces seems to be a great fit.
127.
by commoner 3y ago
Users of free and open source software also give back by contributing feedback, bug reports, and patches. They promote the software through word of mouth and offer support to other users, building a community that extends the longevity of t
128.
by commoner 3y ago
n8n is source-available, not open source, because they restrict commercial use. They acknowledge this themselves: https://docs.n8n.io/choose-n8n/faircode-license/#is-n8n-open...
129.
by commoner 3y ago
LibreOffice has the same feature. Type Shift+Esc or go to Help > Search Commands to activate the head-up display. You can then search for the command you want. GIF demo: https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2021/08/libr
130.
by commoner 3y ago
The Snap client is hard-coded to use Canonical's Snap Store server, so not only would the developer have to reimplement the server, they would also need to fork the Snap client to support alternative servers. Anyone who wants to use an
131.
by commoner 3y ago
Thank you for making this change. It distinguishes OpenCopilot from many of the other projects in this space, and gives users and developers a much greater incentive to contribute back.
132.
by commoner 3y ago
The point of my comment is to highlight how the OpenCopilot License is neither free nor open source. The MIT License (Expat License) is also a free software license, and you can use the FSF's link if you prefer: https://dire
133.
by commoner 3y ago
Ubuntu has actually gotten worse over the years ever since it started coaxing users into using Snap. It was revolting when Ubuntu forced Chromium to be installed as a Snap when the user attempted to install it through apt. Requiring Snap in
134.
by commoner 3y ago
The OpenCopilot License looks like a modified version of the MIT License, since the all-caps portion is taken verbatim from the original license: > THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS IS”, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLU
135.
by commoner 3y ago
> I'm referring to the outdated open source definition that is causing great projects leave the open source community. The Open Source Definition is not "outdated" just because you claim it is. It is still serving its purp
136.
by commoner 3y ago
> Imaging you want to bring down and rebuild a temple because it's constructed with asbestos (which now we know is carcinogenic) That's a terrible analogy, because open source software is not "carcinogenic". If you do
137.
by commoner 3y ago
Why are you so intent on hijacking the term open source to refer to software that does not preserve the user's freedom to use the software as they wish? The goal of open source software is to preserve the user's freedoms, not to p
138.
by commoner 3y ago
> Meta has already called it's software open source. And it may be fair enough. Llama 2 is not open source for two reasons. First and most importantly, the license restricts certain types of commercial use, while open source softwar
139.
by commoner 3y ago
The SSPL does give MongoDB Inc. monopoly power by ensuring that only MongoDB Inc. can offer proprietary closed source software services in conjunction with MongoDB, while other vendors may only offer source-available software services in co
140.
by commoner 3y ago
FOSS developers and users have been using the terms free software, open source software, and free and open source software for decades to describe software that is licensed in a way that allows any user to use, modify, and redistribute it f
141.
by commoner 3y ago
> The current definition allows all users to use the open source software as they wish. And there's no problem with that. If you want to restrict how your software is used while making the source publicly available, then go ahead an
142.
by commoner 3y ago
I see that you are the author of these "Collective Source"/"Research Solutions" pages, based on the social media username listed on your HN profile. The purpose of your entire article is to label the Open Source Ini
143.
by commoner 3y ago
This website "Collective Source" is an egregious attempt to rebrand source-available software as open source, even when the software doesn't meet the basic standards of the Open Source Definition, which is widely accepted by
144.
by commoner 3y ago
Meta would be thrilled to see KOSA pass, since it the time and effort required to censor any content alleged to trigger anxiety or depression would cause smaller social networks to be infeasible to run. How is a Mastodon instance supposed t
145.
by commoner 3y ago
It's not "desperate" to evaluate a bill by its actual text. Judging by the presumably incorrect language used in Section 3(b)(1) and the ill-considered mandate to "prevent and mitigate" anxiety and depression in Sec
146.
by commoner 3y ago
> Allowing Meta et al to run amok unchecked on America's youth KOSA will implement government-mandated censorship against any content that is believed to trigger anxiety or depression, which is not an effective way to aid minors. In
147.
by commoner 3y ago
> KOSA does NOT prevent people under 18 from watching anything they want. You're assuming that people under 18 do not want to see content that may trigger anxiety or depression. The reality is that not everything in the world is pos
148.
by commoner 3y ago
Government-mandated censorship does not suddenly become acceptable when it is restricted to user-generated content on a website that is not operated by a non-profit. When the government prevents people under 18 from watching YouTube videos
149.
by commoner 3y ago
The worst part of the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) is the requirement that websites "prevent and mitigate" anxiety and depression in users and viewers under 18 years of age. Here is the exact text from the bill's Section 3(a
150.
by commoner 3y ago
The text of Section 3(b)(1) is phrased in such a way that it actually does not address the censorship concern, since it only allows people under 18 to search for censored content, but still does not allow websites to display censored co

More ›