cyclohexane

@cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

West Asia - Communist - international politics - anti-imperialism - software development - Math, science, chemistry, history, sociology, and a lot more.

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

cyclohexane,

The author would likely really enjoy gentoo. Imo it has all those benefits and a little more, plus its more popular.

cyclohexane,

Its increasingly difficult to block 100% of possible ads, but good luck

cyclohexane,

Move account to another unethical, profit driven bank or?

Y’all still believe in the illusion of choice / opt-out in capitalism.

Is there a License that requires the user to donate if they make revenue?

I tried a couple license finders and I even looked into the OSI database but I could not find a license that works pretty much like agpl but requiring payment (combined 1% of revenue per month, spread evenly over all FOSS software, if applicable) if one of these is true:...

cyclohexane,

it is not FOSS

If you take the OSI or FSF definition, sure. Not all of us take that definition.

For many people, the appeal of open source has nothing to do with how easy it is for corporations. It is about transparency, the ability to contribute, and the community driven product as a result. It is about the ability to pick up the project if the original developer stops using it, even decades later. It’s about the ease of interfacing with said software.

Again, you may quote the FSF, but there are too many users of open source, as well as developers, who got into it for the reasons I stated. I can assure you that they are not doing it so that corporations can profit off their software without giving back.

cyclohexane,

That’s the FSF definition. Most users and developers of open source do not care at all about that, and certainly do not care about protecting corporate right to use their software without giving back.

To many of them, open source is about transparency, community driven development, open contribution model, forkability, etc.

cyclohexane,

The FSF and OSI do not allow licenses that limit corporate leech or restrict profiting of software without giving back.

cyclohexane,

I am pretty sure that if you ask most open source developers if they are happy about corporations profitting off their software without giving back, they would say no.

cyclohexane,

no, thats also the open source definition

Correction: the definition of open source by a specific organization, the OSI.

I don’t remember voting or appointing the OSI as our legitimate representative. But you know who did? Corporations like Amazon, Google, Bloomberg, and many of them: opensource.org/sponsors

I do not subscribe to a definition from such an organization, just because it has open source in the name.

cyclohexane, (edited )

with strong copyleft licenses, businesses must give back, namely when expanding the program

A user is required to make the source open only if they create a derivative work of the copyleft licensed work, and only if said work was distributed to users. And if I remember correctly, it is only required to open the source to the users it was distributed to.

They do not have to do any profit sharing or donation. They are not even required to make the code open source if they merely use this program, or they interface with it. They are not required to do anything if they only use it internally.

cyclohexane,

I have two arguments: first, it’s not true that the OSI coined the term. But more importantly, it isn’t even important if it was true. What matters is the context in which the open source movement emerged, and how people who use the term think of it.

The open source / free software movement was born in universities who primarily wanted to erase the barriers on collaboration between them, and wanted to follow an open model. They grew frustrated of the proprietary and opaque model of software written by major corporations. They could not use it. So they decided to write their own free software and combine their efforts to not rely on corporate or proprietary software.

Back then, corporations were uninterested in open source. In fact they were hostile to it and wanted it to die. The issue that we deal with today of corporations leeching on open source did not exist, so the fact that the movement did not specifically fight this does not mean they’re okay with it. The corporate hostility took a different form and that’s what they combatted.

On OSI coining the term, the OSI themselves claim it was coined by Christine Peterson. They do not claim that they founded the term, nor that the founder had an affiliation with them: opensource.org/history

cyclohexane,

What did the original kernel not support?

cyclohexane,

Wayfire is not tiling right? I imagine its a similar reason people didn’t use open box much. It’s a non-tiling window system, and people who go that route tend to to full DE. But I am with you. I wonder why not many more people use them.

Doas is cool. I actually switched to it shortly before ditching both it and sudo, and deciding to rely on a users/groups system.

cyclohexane,

The efficiency of capitalism. Spend god-knows-how-many millions of dollars and time, then realize you’d rather spend 125 million all over again just to go back and spend even more millions to hire back the dame numbers again in 1-3 years.

cyclohexane,

I understand that, but still, the decision is a net negative. They are merely acting based on short-sighted insights.

cyclohexane,

The layoff wave started way before the AI hype. It is more tied to interest rates imo.

cyclohexane,

Higher ups doing this is nothing new though. This was mostly a reaction to interest rates.

cyclohexane,

Unfortunately it doesn’t mean that. Game corporations have too much power and influence over the market.

cyclohexane,

I think it is Hyprland that is the outlier in being animated by default, rather than sway being especially barebones. Compared to popular WMs on X11, sway is not minimal. Compare to dwm and bspwm for example, both of which are pretty popular yet more minimal than sway.

cyclohexane,

I love when people on the Internet say “X did Y quietly” to make it more suspenseful. This doesn’t look quiet to me…

cyclohexane,

That’s a fair argument, thanks for showing me the other perspective!

Imho, I prefer an editor that focuses on doing editing right, and provides the interface and APIs for integration with other things. I get the appeal of built-in LSP working OOTB, but I prefer this gets done by distributing the a good editor pre-packaged with LSP and other plugins, sort of like how you get lunarvim or nvchad as neovim with config and plugins ready. This way you get LSP out of the box, but others can customize if they need.

helix […] shares kakounes keybindings and input system

I get that it is inspired from it, but it felt like a strange in-between to me. It still has 3 modes, and the two non-insert modes seemed not to have a well-defined boundary. It didn’t just click with me. Kakoune seems to do it much better imho.

You can do this [shell integration] in vim and helix as well

I know vim has some basic she’ll integration, but it is not the same as Kakoune’s, unless I missed those features in vim and helix. I don’t wanna duplicate things, so I recommend you read the shell section of this page: kakoune.org/why-kakoune/why-kakoune.html

cyclohexane,

Upvoted for Manjaro, downvoted for gentoo. (no vote as a result)

cyclohexane,

iOS is fully proprietary, so while some might argue that it is more private, it is almost impossible to know. What we do know is that it isn’t private, and apple has a track record against privacy.

I think comparing the two platforms from a privacy perspective is pointless. You’re not going to be private either way. Might as well focus on other factors.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • fightinggames
  • All magazines
    •