jdiff

31 ms·

961.
by jdiff 4y ago
Transcripts exist, and if there's multiple YouTube tutorials out there the odds are very good it also exists as a few dozen plain text articles.
962.
by jdiff 4y ago
Plus some providers mandate that bootloaders can't be unlocked if sold bundled with their service, even if that device is normally unlock-friendly.
963.
by jdiff 4y ago
HN is quite transphobic. Any post they make devolves into harassment over that and (usually) pointless whining about the format their posts are usually made in (long tweet/toot threads).
964.
by jdiff 4y ago
Go didn't just add the reuse flag, they broke the 1.19 feature freeze to get it pushed through and even mentioned Drew's original issue in that request. Drew rejected this temporary solution loudly for many years on principle only
965.
by jdiff 4y ago
Thank you, you're the first person to point out that him taking the temporary solution that was offered years ago after several angry blog posts about how it was unacceptable in principle or practice is inconsistent at best and hypocri
966.
by jdiff 4y ago
Yes. He had plenty of opportunity to state problems if they existed. Relaying harm caused would have likely accelerated things, and if harm was being done he would have taken up the still-open offer to solve this problem in the interim whil
967.
by jdiff 4y ago
Technically it'd be a DDoS, but however distributed it is makes no difference to what we're talking about here. If you could respond to substance, it'd be appreciated.
968.
by jdiff 4y ago
If an amount of traffic that nobody else even notices brings you to your knees, you're doing something wrong. Go could be far more efficient but pointing at this and calling it a DDoS is silly.
969.
by jdiff 4y ago
No problems were ever mentioned, serious or otherwise. Elevated traffic isn't automatically a problem. Drew's played it up quite a lot elsewhere, but the Go team can only be reasonably expected to follow the one issue filed, not D
970.
by jdiff 4y ago
This smells wildly overdramatic. They've been working on solutions big and small since it was reported, it's just that the big solutions take time, this was communicated to Drew.
971.
by jdiff 4y ago
How are you getting that number? There's Drew, who refused all solutions offered. There's Ben, who took the offer and was satisfied. If you're counting Gentoo, which is linked, you shouldn't because that's an unrela
972.
by jdiff 4y ago
From what I can tell, per Drew's own characterization of the requests[0], this is wildly off in all aspects. Most repos are hundreds of KB. Large repos are a dozen MB. Per the other guy's characterization[1], his repo was less tha
973.
by jdiff 4y ago
No other independent hosters are having issues. I'm on one with no more than a few dozen users. Multiple of us write in Go, including the owner of the service, and yet Gitea and the VPS hosting it have never even blinked. If there were
974.
by jdiff 4y ago
Why should better drivers be permitted to road rage? That's just a nonsensical question, being unable to drive without being a menace makes you a worse driver.
975.
by jdiff 4y ago
Despite the issue, I'm not convinced that Go doesn't do shallow fetches vs deep clones. Other issues (like Gentoo's issue with the proxy, I don't have a link handy sadly) point to fetches being done normally, not clones.
976.
by jdiff 4y ago
The AGPLv3 only requires that you make the source available, that can even be on request, that can be on a CD. You can even, to quote the AGPLv3 itself, charge for that CD "for a price no more than your reasonable cost of physically pe
977.
by jdiff 4y ago
They own it, sure, but they license it out freely. They've released their work under a license that allows anyone use of their trademark, as long as they stick by the AGPLv3. The AGPLv3 is written permission.
978.
by jdiff 4y ago
The icon is in the repo covered by the AGPLv3. Signal-Desktop does not have a CLA that would enable them to license the built binary anything but AGPLv3, as they do not have sole copyright over the code. They themselves are also bound by th
979.
by jdiff 4y ago
Those channels are illegal to use outside of the copyright issues they're intended for. It's not just a free "hey take this down for me, will ya?" button.
980.
by jdiff 4y ago
You've never seen the popups? If a WebExtension doesn't request access to all sites, it can only access sites that it's activated on by pressing the toolbar button (MDN refers to them as action buttons if you want to take a l
981.
by jdiff 4y ago
I'm not sure I understand your confusion entirely, would appreciate some clarification. It's bad in any case, it's worse when you're uninformed on an issue core to your entire mission. This is an area their lawyers shoul
982.
by jdiff 4y ago
The law doesn't give them the ability, as the DMCA is for copyright and with an unrestricted free software license, there is no copyright issue. The takedown itself was illegal.
983.
by jdiff 4y ago
All of their builds have shelf lives of 90 days. You must update at least that often or your app will stop working, so it's a non-starter for inclusion in the official Debian repos.
984.
by jdiff 4y ago
The Snap's build instructions do nothing but download the .deb and repackage it into a Snap.
985.
by jdiff 4y ago
Read the full context of that rule. The entire section allows those provisions to be applied, it does not make those provisions. The APGLv3 disallows any further restrictions beyond the license to be applied, except for a handful of excepti
986.
by jdiff 4y ago
Because it means their lawyers are firing off in random, uninformed directions. There's no copyright issue, as the maintainers of the Snap have a copyright license (the AGPLv3) to do what they are doing. You could argue that it'
987.
by jdiff 4y ago
Signal is not saying this, as evidenced by the cofounder saying that this is all a misunderstanding and that they're working to undo what's been done.
988.
by jdiff 4y ago
Firefox's license did not permit use of trademark. Eventually an exception was made, and now GNU IceCat is mostly a relic. Signal's license on the other hand, does permit use of trademark. If nothing else this means that using the
989.
by jdiff 4y ago
Yeah, it's possible for a web server to detect and change the returned data maliciously. Even with user agent and all other factors changed to match, it's possible to detect even the difference between being piped into another com
990.
by jdiff 4y ago
It wasn't against the license. It's AGPL v3, about as open as it gets.

More ›