@bear@slrpnk.net

bear

@bear@slrpnk.net

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

bear,

It seems to me that you’ve just made up your mind and as such are not invested in even trying to understand other arguments.

bear,

It really seems like you didn’t have an actual argument, you just wanted to whine and duck away from any pushback.

bear,

it’s probably time to come to terms with the fact that better alternatives would have arisen had anyone thought they could truly manage it.

This is the most important takeaway. There’s a lot of people whining about Wayland, but Wayland devs are currently the only people actually willing to put in the work. Nobody wants to work on X and nobody wants to make an alternative to Wayland, so why do we keep wasting time on this topic?

bear,

Look, I’m usually first in line to shit on Canonical, but I can’t get mad at them adopting AGPL. This is objectively the best license for server software. Incus should also switch to AGPL for all Canonical code, and seek to have contributors license their code as AGPL as well.

I will however point out the hypocrisy and inconsistency of it, because the Snap server is still proprietary after all of this time. If this is their “standard for server-side code” then apply it to Snaps or quit lying to us.

bear, (edited )

The full details are complex but I’ll give you the basic gist. The original GPL licenses essentially say that if you give somebody the compiled binary, they are legally entitled to have the source code as well, along with the rights to modify and redistribute it so long as they too follow the same rules. It creates a system where code flows down freely like water.

However, this doesn’t apply if you don’t give them the binary. For example, taking an open source GPL-licensed project and running it on a server instead. The GPL doesn’t apply, so you can modify it and do whatever, and you aren’t required to share the source code if other people access it because that’s not specified in the GPL.

The AGPL was created to address this. It adds a stipulation that if you give people access to the software on a remote system, they are still entitled to the source code and all the same rights to modify and redistribute it. Code now flows freely again, and all is well.

The only “issue” is that the GPL/AGPL are only one-way compatible with the Apache/MIT/BSD/etc licenses. These licenses put minimal requirements on code sharing, so it’s completely fine to add their code to GPL projects. But themselves, they aren’t up to GPL requirements, so GPL code can’t be added to Apache projects.

Is Ubuntu deserving the hate? (lemmy.ml)

Long story short, I have a desktop with Fedora, lovely, fast, sleek and surprisingly reliable for a near rolling distro (it failed me only once back around Fedora 34 or something where it nuked Grub). Tried to install on a 2012 i7 MacBook Air… what a slog!!! Surprisingly Ubuntu runs very smooth on it. I have been bothering all...

bear,

Most Snaps have apt or Flatpak alternatives.

I’m simply not going to support a distro that creates a proprietary service and ships it as the default source of software. I will support and use distros that open source their code so that everyone can benefit from it. Whether workarounds or alternatives exist is unimportant, my prime issue with Ubuntu and Canonical is with their principles, not Ubuntu’s quality as a product to be consumed by me.

bear, (edited )

Me reacting to analogies with “Did you know these two things are not completely identical?”, completely unburdened by the knowledge that I’m supposed to explain how the differences invalidate the comparison.

bear,

I’d argue it’s pretty stupid to use FOSS but then depend on a proprietary server that only one for-profit company is allowed to run to deliver all that software, trusting them to just never do wrong or leave you high and dry. I’d also argue it fits the analogy perfectly, because the analogy was about saying “I haven’t had a problem yet” in response to being shown the potential problems of the action.

bear,

It’s not an opinion that proprietary for-profit software will betray you, it is an inevitability. It has happened every single time. If it was FOSS, we could salvage it. It’s proprietary, so we can’t. When it fails it must simply be abandoned. I just hope you learn the right lesson when this happens.

bear, (edited )

WinRAR will either die, or be sold and squeezed by its new owners. Nobody lives forever and no asset goes unflipped in this market. You can say you won’t update, but that just leaves you vulnerable.

bear,

If I were to list every FOSS project that has lasted longer, I’d have to spend all day writing the post. winRAR is unique in that it’s one of the only pieces of long-lasting proprietary software that didn’t die or turn to crap. Such things are not unique or even rare in FOSS.

bear,

Most people do not care about their init system. Fewer still care about your init system. Use what you want, just quit shouting about it.

bear,

It’s far better than it used to be. They didn’t get the reputation for no reason. There were lots of Nvidia-specific bugs that have been slowly sorted out over the years. I’m told Wayland is even in a roughly usable state now. But it takes a lot of time to regain the lost trust. Let’s see how long it takes them to support HDR, and what that support looks like.

bear,

The computer didn’t get it wrong; the computer did exactly what it was programmed to do. Blaming the computer implies that this can be solved by fixing the computer, that it “just wasn’t good enough yet”, when it was the humans who actually did it. It was the humans who were supposed to exercise their judgment that got it wrong. You can’t fix that from the computer.

bear,

Why doesn’t Israel stop doing things that require other countries to intervene

bear,

Adding my voice to the Debian choir.

bear,

If you actually believed this, you wouldn’t work. You don’t really believe it, though.

bear,

Anarchism is less a system of functions to be implemented, and more of a governing philosophy on how we build other systems. That philosophy focuses heavily on the expansion of democracy and the elimination of hierarchy wherever possible in order to create the most total freedom in the system. It is not inherently opposed to the concepts of governance or laws as many believe. It usually means focusing on smaller governing units, preferring local governance wherever possible, to give people the most direct control over their own lives. Self-sufficient communities are a major goal here.

The meaning of freedom to an anarchist is wholistic; not just freedom to, but also freedom from. Freedom to pursue your life on your terms, freedom from any obligation or inhibition that would prevent or detract from that goal. This includes, for example, unconditional freedom for all people from starvation, homelessness, or the inability to access medical care. It is an intentionally utopian ideal, that we should strive for something that may not even be possible, because that is how we’ll create the best possible world.

Once upon a time, anarchism was effectively synonymous with libertarianism. That word was bastardized in America to the point that it is unrecognizable now.

bear,

I literally didn’t put it together that it was FS-Tab until a couple years ago when I was setting up an encrypted drive manually in /etc/crypttab, something I had done many times before, when it finally clicked.

I’ve used Linux heavily for about 15 years.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • localhost
  • All magazines
    •
    Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #