tumult

15 ms·

151.
by tumult 4y ago
Computers aren’t humans. Software isn’t a person. If you’re going to argue as if computers are now people and deserve having laws apply to them, think about the implications of you owning a human.
152.
by tumult 4y ago
Computers aren’t human. Software isn’t people.
153.
by tumult 4y ago
These are apparently false DMCA letters. Attribution or payments aren’t really relevant. According to the article, the person filing the claims has no ownership of the copyright. Even if they were being ripped off (which it doesn’t seem lik
154.
by tumult 4y ago
Ripcord will temporarily remember deleted messages for channels in which you're a moderator. You can view the contents by right-clicking on the message. It won't do this if you aren't a moderator in that channel. This is to h
155.
by tumult 4y ago
Yeah, that’s already the case with every online service. They don’t need to be vague — they don’t have to give any reason for banning you.
156.
by tumult 4y ago
That's not the TOS. That's a 3 year old tweet with multiple people in the replies asking to cite where in the TOS it says that, and no further reply from the official account.
157.
by tumult 4y ago
Can you show where in the TOS third-party clients are disallowed? (The Discord TOS does not even mention third-party clients.)
158.
by tumult 4y ago
Computers aren't human. Software isn't people.
159.
by tumult 4y ago
1) The Supreme Court's 2021 ruling of Van Buren vs United States CFAA ended the era of the CFAA being used as a legal tool to stop interoperability. 2) You can use another company's marks, names, etc. to indicate your product work
160.
by tumult 4y ago
The time of CFAA being wielded to suppress interoperability is over. The Supreme Court's 2021 ruling of Van Buren vs United States put an end to it.
161.
by tumult 4y ago
Computers aren't people. Software isn't humans.
162.
by tumult 4y ago
Is this actually true? I searched and didn't find anything about LG ending their computer display LCD manufacturing.
163.
by tumult 4y ago
Not a violation. Decided by Supreme Court in 2021. Van Buren vs. United States. It was a big deal.
164.
by tumult 4y ago
In the imaginary world where that's what the terms of service says, that's still fine for Ripcord -- Ripcord isn't a derivative work.
165.
by tumult 4y ago
Ripcord isn't a derivative work, both practically and in the legal sense. It's implemented from scratch. Ripcord isn't a resell of their service or a sublicense of their service.
166.
by tumult 4y ago
I would like to say stuff about it, but can't just yet.
167.
by tumult 4y ago
In the case of Discord, for example, the terms of service doesn't even mention third-party clients. Also, these services are accessible from web browsers, which are made by third parties. There are more reasons, like users being able t
168.
by tumult 4y ago
I mean, you don't have to. I appreciate the skepticism. I am the actual author of Ripcord. I've had an account here for many years. You will not find someone with better firsthand knowledge about Ripcord surviving or not surviving
169.
by tumult 4y ago
Author of Ripcord. You’re wrong, and creating and using software compatible with services is fair.
170.
by tumult 4y ago
Author of Ripcord. You don’t know what you’re talking about and shouldn’t broadcast your assumptions as fact.
171.
by tumult 4y ago
The second (or first, maybe) most popular Uxn emulator, Uxn32, has sandboxed filesystem access, and has had it since the beginning. The author of the original article doesn't know what they're talking about.
172.
by tumult 4y ago
Uxn32, a full Uxn implementation for Win32, already implements this kind of filesystem sandbox, and has for months. I don't think the author did any research, and instead focused on research-y aesthetics.
173.
by tumult 5y ago
Not stopped. The next update is being worked on.
174.
by tumult 5y ago
A third party client like Ripcord isn't a derivative work. It also wasn't made by reverse engineering any of Discord's code. Even if it were, these rules still wouldn't apply to using third party clients.
175.
by tumult 5y ago
Just curious -- where in the TOS are third party clients forbidden? I've read it a few times, and I'm not seeing it.
176.
by tumult 5y ago
Thanks. I hadn’t seen that when I checked the news before posting.
177.
by tumult 5y ago
This article from The New Daily states that two deaths were caused by contaminated vaccines. But as far as I know, this has not been stated here in Japan—two people who had received vaccines from a lot that had been suspended (not confirmed
178.
by tumult 5y ago
> As I recall, shareware never did that. It violates the spirit of leaving the user alone, user automonomy. Lots of shareware did and does that. It's normal. It's just an update check. It doesn't self-update. It doesn&#x27
179.
by tumult 6y ago
If you're talking about the iPhone, yes. But they lost a bunch with their desktop computers with this unaddressed, apparently very real problem. Unless there is some news and it turned out to be a hoax? But it seems real.
180.
by tumult 6y ago
Their track record includes their responses to issues like these. If they ignore it, that's worse than trying to rectify it or address or mitigate its severity.

More ›