pabs3

59 ms·

961.
by pabs3 1y ago
Looks like Debian removed olvwm/olwm because they were incompatible with 64-bit and unmaintained. https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/xview https://tracker.debian.org/news/1000764/removed-32p1
962.
An engineer's perspective on hiring(jyn.dev)
191 points by pabs3 1y ago|239 comments
963.
Additional Intel Linux Kernel Drivers Left Orphaned and Maintainers Let Go(phoronix.com)
20 points by pabs3 1y ago|2 comments
964.
by pabs3 1y ago
Enough that I really need to buy more RAM.
965.
by pabs3 1y ago
They shouldn't own patents, they should release their inventions into the public domain.
966.
Let's properly analyze an AI article for once(nibblestew.blogspot.com)
226 points by pabs3 1y ago|140 comments
967.
by pabs3 1y ago
A toy Kotlin compiler could probably be useful to bootstrap Kotlin from source, without any existing Kotlin binaries. Looks like there is no path to do that right now. https://bootstrappable.org/projects/jvm-languages.h
968.
by pabs3 1y ago
The MIT license does require attribution, in the form of the copyright notice, which must be included in all copies of the code, including ones built into a binary. Even if you had made it AGPL, people deliberately violate that all the time
969.
by pabs3 1y ago
JS will have been removed in favour of WASM by then surely?
970.
by pabs3 1y ago
Folks are reverse engineering Xilinx tooling btw: https://www.kc8apf.net/2018/05/unpacking-xilinx-7-series-bit...
971.
Home Depot and Lowe's Share Data from AI Cameras with Cops(404media.co)
5 points by pabs3 1y ago|2 comments
972.
'We didn't vote for ChatGPT': Swedish PM under fire for using AI in role(theguardian.com)
19 points by pabs3 1y ago|5 comments
973.
The Python Software Foundation Has Paused Our Grants Program(pyfound.blogspot.com)
3 points by pabs3 1y ago|1 comments
974.
Isle FPGA Computer: creating a simple, open, modern computer(projectf.io)
55 points by pabs3 1y ago|13 comments
975.
by pabs3 1y ago
Self-hosted is the better way to do services, not centralised in the government.
976.
by pabs3 1y ago
Weights aren't source code.
977.
by pabs3 1y ago
You can send an email to the owner offering payment in exchange for handing over the project. Usually they will laugh at you or think you are trying to scam them though.
978.
by pabs3 1y ago
Just fork it?
979.
by pabs3 1y ago
That is less about treatement and more about prevention, which the UK NHS is planning on shifting focus to. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jun/29/nhs-health-p...
980.
The Amaranth hardware description language(amaranth-lang.org)
83 points by pabs3 1y ago|34 comments
981.
Against the Computer and Its World (2024)(illwill.com)
2 points by pabs3 1y ago|0 comments
982.
by pabs3 1y ago
The GNU GPL is in no way reciprocal, under it, code flows downstream to users, not back upstream to developers/maintainers. Its only if downstream devs/users are inclined to send code back does it reach upstream devs/maintain
983.
by pabs3 1y ago
> If you've received source code with this license attached, you are free to build, run, and/or redistribute it. Maybe insert a few more rights here, like "modify"?
984.
by pabs3 1y ago
Which tool is that?
985.
by pabs3 1y ago
Are there any secret scanning tools that know about base64 encoded stuff?
986.
Software Rot(permacomputing.net)
232 points by pabs3 1y ago|243 comments
987.
Open Source, Self Hosting – importance of digital sovereignty in changing world(fusil.uk)
2 points by pabs3 1y ago|0 comments
988.
A Letter to the CalyxOS Community(calyxos.org)
19 points by pabs3 1y ago|1 comments
989.
Non-Profit FOSS Solves the Conflict of Interest(home.expurple.me)
3 points by pabs3 1y ago|0 comments
990.
by pabs3 1y ago
The GPL in no way ensures code modifications go back upstream. It certainly is not a requirement of the license. There are a ton of Linux kernel forks that will never be upstream.

More ›