Is it even possible to report bugs to Microsoft without paid support? I always come across that Windows community forum where every solution to a problem is to update drivers, run sfc /scannow, etc. I doubt anybody on that forum can relay problems to Microsoft staff.
I think that Vercel wants to drop them as a customer entirely. Vercel could’ve suspended the services related to 12ft.io, but Vercel chose to nuke their account from orbit. I’m unsure why Vercel suspended their domains tho. That’s just asking for trouble with ICANN.
They require extensive configuration due to insensible defaults.
They require manual intervention from time to time even with a good configuration.
They can’t even fulfill their purpose. Bazarr shits the bed with anime.
*arr apps don’t handle text streams.
But I think the Unix philosophy is flawed anyways. It’s like the metaverse: When a metaverse succeeds, they attribute that success to the metaverse as a concept. When a metaverse fails, they attribute the failure to that metaverse, not the metaverse as a concept. Now substitute metaverse with unix utility and the metaverse as a concept with the unix philosophy.
Yes, the European Commission said that adblock detection is illegal back in 2016. But they believe it’s a legitimate interest, and said that they want to legalize adblock detection in a press statement back in 2017.
Can users still use ad blockers?
The proposal does not regulate the use of ad blockers. Users have the freedom to install software on their devices that disables the display of advertisement. At the same time, the Commission is aware that ‘free’ content on the internet is often funded by advertisement revenue. Important bit: Therefore, the proposal allows website providers to check if the end-user’s device is able to receive their content, including advertisement, without obtaining the end-user’s consent. If a website provider notes that not all content can be received by the end-user, it is up to the website provider to respond appropriately, for example by asking end-users if they use an ad-blocker and would be willing to switch it off for the respective website.
Edit: I highlighted where they state that they want to legalize adblock detection.
Open source licenses must allow free redistribution. FTL allows license suspension and termination at any time, without notice, for any or no reason.
Open source licenses must allow source code distribution. FTL allows restrictions to access the code at any time, without notice, for any or no reason.
Open source licenses must allow modifications. FTL allows modifications only for non-commercial use, or maybe not even that. FTL dodges the word modifications here, no clue.
Open source licenses must explicitly allow distribution of software built from modified source code. FTL forbids distribution of software built from modified source code for commercial use.
Open source licenses must not discriminate against persons/groups and fields of endeavor. FTL allows license suspension and termination at any time, without notice, for any or no reason.
The FTL enables the following practices:
Copyright holders can change the license terms.
Copyright holders can re-license everything.
Copyright holders can target specific groups and individuals with discriminatory license terms.
Copyright holders can close source everything.
Copyright holders can forbid specific groups and individuals from using their work.
Open source licenses must allow free redistribution. FTL allows license suspension and termination at any time, without notice, for any or no reason.
Open source licenses must allow source code distribution. FTL allows restrictions to access the code at any time, without notice, for any or no reason.
Open source licenses must allow modifications. FTL allows modifications only for non-commercial use, or maybe not even that. FTL dodges the word modifications here, no clue.
Open source licenses must explicitly allow distribution of software built from modified source code. FTL forbids distribution of software built from modified source code for commercial use.
Open source licenses must not discriminate against persons/groups and fields of endeavor. FTL allows license suspension and termination at any time, without notice, for any or no reason.
The FTL enables the following practices:
Copyright holders can change the license terms.
Copyright holders can re-license everything.
Copyright holders can target specific groups and individuals with discriminatory license terms.
Copyright holders can close source everything.
Copyright holders can forbid specific groups and individuals from using their work.
My main gripe here is that the video sells a source-available software with severe usage restrictions as open-source. These restrictions may sound reasonable to people outside of the open-source world, especially to people who use similar wording in their own terms of service, but nobody would touch your software with a ten foot pole with a software license like that.