eeZah7Ux

45 ms·

481.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
A text file in git or syncthing does the same.
482.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
Yes! I was surprised by the choice of the obnoxious and dull patterns from 1960's.
483.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
so?
484.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
Not: put a gun to people in other countries heads to force them to sign contracts that are very favorable to the US https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunboat_diplomacy
485.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
> that referring to HashiCorp (and other) projects as "open source" is a half truth Spot on. Corporate "open source" is often open only in terms of licensing, but not in terms of values. Many companies use tricks to p
486.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
> Is HashiCorp known to do this? HashiCorp and other companies doing "devops" tools are known for using "open core" and hijacking the spirit of open source in many ways.
487.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
> Advertising is an example of fully decentralized propaganda Not at all. Centralization is absolutely crucial to deliver advertising. Getting a bigger audience to attract larger advertisers is what pushed newspapers, radios, television
488.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
First of all "that employee needs to open source all IP related to their contribution to the project" is false. The contribution of a chunk of code to an external project is just that. Anything else that belongs to google that you
489.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
> If a Google employee in their free time contributes to an AGPL project, that employee needs to open source all IP related to their contribution to the project Absolutely false. This is simply not how copyright works!
490.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
> how are you doing "They can purchase a commercial license to remove the copyleft restrictions"? This is incorrect. If you own copyright on something you can transfer those rights to other people in any way you want. I can giv
491.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
The copyright system is always there and works regardless of your licenses. If you pick a "public domain" license, or MIT or WTFPL you are just building upon the copyright system in a different way than GPL or some other license o
492.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
The copyright system is always there and works regardless of your licenses. You cannot "use" it or "not use it". If you pick a "public domain" license, or MIT or WTFPL you
493.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
Not at all! In 90% of legal systems copyright applies automatically and not having a license makes your software closed source by default. The concept of copyright existed long before software licenses and long before the (c) symbol. It oft
494.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
> choose a license that excludes Googlers This is entirely google's decision. It's obviously not a decision made to help FLOSS or FLOSS developers. > Out of personal self-interest, I want to maximize the number of people who
495.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
The majority of [A]GPL users I know are also uncomfortable with the legal system enforcing copyright, patents and trademarks. And this is the whole point of copyleft: turn copyright around itself to ensure user freedom.
496.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
Indeed. Use a static generator properly packaged in a Linux distribution and you'll have reliability and security updates. Use a self-contined binaries from random sources and goodbye security.
497.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
> Unfortunately This is a deliberate choice from companies that want to exploit open source without giving back to the ecosystem.
498.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
Yes, and that's why NSA successfully intercepted google's fiber optic cables and so on.
499.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
> that cat is out of the bag Not at all, this is a logical fallacy. A small fraction of countries have nuclear weapons and yet they still engage in conventional warfare because they really don't want to trigger a nuclear holocaust.
500.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
This comparison is absurd. A minority of laptops are thinkpads, a fraction of those have SIM cards, and, finally, attacking that subsystem requires serious skills and the benefits are dubious. Compare that with android/ios phones, whic
501.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
> How are smartphones and tablets different from laptops and regular phones in this regard? They are more likely to be attacked because they are better targets. They are more often carried around, have GPS and more cameras. They are MUCH
502.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
Plus, you save CPU, memory, bandwidth and electricity.
503.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
Your analysis is quite incorrect. Bots and browsers produce fairly different logs in terms of file access pattern, timing, user agent and known source networks. Filtering users from bots can be done on the server side. Identifying users tha
504.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
The users are paying for it with their privacy. CDN providers are not charities: they sell traffic metadata.
505.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
> Nuclear energy accounts for about 6% of the world's energy mix. It is the safest source of carbon-free energy in terms of deaths per TWh in the world, ...as long as you completely ignore the risk of large catastrophic events. Like
506.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
> my concern is whether we can maintain a stable political environment for the decades/hundred years required to responsibly take care of nuclear. Spot on. People often ignore the political problems of nuclear power: - Centralizatio
507.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
https://goaccess.io/ does the same analytics and does not require exposing a dedicated service
508.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
> To my understanding, these smart speakers only phone home when you say the keyword, right? They aren't storing or sending everything they hear throughout the day. 1) There has been various cases of such devices being triggered in
509.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
No thanks!
510.
by eeZah7Ux 6y ago
No.

More ›