539 posts and 66 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.
Although he still hasn't regained his position at MIT, Richard Stallman is returning to the board of the Free Software Foundation.http://techrights.org/2021/03/21/richard-stallman-is-coming-back-to-the-board-of-the-free-software-foundation-founded-by-himself-35-years-ago/
How will the corporate apologists, identarian social climbers, and Microsoft agents who smeared him in the first place respond to this?
Yeah I don't know what I'll do without one night stands and choosing people for sex as if I was looking at a restaurant menu.
About making a free open source dating application, it would be interesting to base the matching algorithm on a live interpreter so the match-making code could be edited by users on the fly.
>make FLOSS dating app
>reproduce the same unhealthy dynamics that regular dating apps encourage
>but hey, it's FLOSS!!!
This is Silicon Valley-tier stupidity.
How do you make it a healthy dynamic ? A text and voice only version so people are matched based on compatible personality ?
the term "autism" is abused a lot, but modern liberal feminism makes discrimination against legitimately autistic men socially acceptable
Stopped reading there.
All you have to do in the short term is license your projects with (A)GPLv3 exactly, removing>or (at your option) any later versionhttps://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html
I have a feeling that the neo-liberals want to lock down all computing into wall garderns.
how is the situation with free and open source hardware ?
Yes, this is openly their goal. They want personal computing to be phased out in favor of glass bricks that stream everything from private companies. The music and video industry have been consumed by this goal entirely, video games are the current thing they're obsessed with taking away. Companies like Salesforce want to kill personal computing entirely (coincidentally, Sarah Mei of Salesforce is one of the most psychotically anti-Stallman individuals around. She celebrated when he risked homelessness).
Terry A. Davis was unironically correct about this.
That sounds really bad. What's to be done to safe personal computing ?
Libre hardware + right to repair + right to upgrade would need to take a higher priority. Normies will probably blindly accept SaaSS world because of the convenience (they accepted blatant corporate greed in the form of airpods) of it, so new free software should use the AGPLv3 to fight corporate attempts to make everything totally proprietary.
Getting the funds to start producing non-porkified modern hardware would be the hardest part. There are a lot of computing features that have a devoted following but are not produced anyway - things like 16:10 aspect ratios, classic laptop keyboards, keyboard phones, replaceable batteries and screens…
RISC V shows potential, but it has a permissive license so we should assume most RISC V productions in the future will have some sort of anti-user proprietary bullshit.
But how future proof is (A)GPLv3? we need regular updates to keep software libre
I'm not good at computing, but that'd be an interesting thread to lurk
nothing as satisfying as making life hard for billiondollar corporations amirite
>>7997>But how future proof is (A)GPLv3? we need regular updates to keep software libre
An update is needed when there is a specific reason for it, not for the sake of having updates. You know you need an update when corporations embrace the current version because they found enough loopholes to neutralize it. You then draft a new version to close those loopholes.https://www.gnu.org/licenses/rms-why-gplv3.html
The fact that they are still seething about v3 and have unleashed their cancellation machinery https://theintercept.com/2021/04/10/campus-reform-koch-young-americans-for-freedom-leadership-institute/
against Stallman is the best signal that in 14 years they haven't found loopholes they like.
>One major danger that GPLv3 will block is tivoization. Tivoization means certain “appliances” (which have computers inside) contain GPL-covered software that you can't effectively change, because the appliance shuts down if it detects modified software. The usual motive for tivoization is that the software has features the manufacturer knows people will want to change, and aims to stop people from changing them. The manufacturers of these computers take advantage of the freedom that free software provides, but they don't let you do likewise.
>Some argue that competition between appliances in a free market should suffice to keep nasty features to a low level. Perhaps competition alone would avoid arbitrary, pointless misfeatures like “Must shut down between 1pm and 5pm every Tuesday”, but even so, a choice of masters isn't freedom. Freedom means you control what your software does, not merely that you can beg or threaten someone else who decides for you.
>In the crucial area of Digital Restrictions Management (DRM)—nasty features designed to restrict your use of the data in your computer—competition is no help, because relevant competition is forbidden. Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and similar laws, it is illegal, in the US and many other countries, to distribute DVD players unless they restrict the user according to the official rules of the DVD conspiracy (its web site is http://www.dvdcca.org/, but the rules do not seem to be published there). The public can't reject DRM by buying non-DRM players because none are available. No matter how many products you can choose from, they all have equivalent digital handcuffs.
>GPLv3 ensures you are free to remove the handcuffs. It doesn't forbid DRM, or any kind of feature. It places no limits on the substantive functionality you can add to a program, or remove from it. Rather, it makes sure that you are just as free to remove nasty features as the distributor of your copy was to add them. Tivoization is the way they deny you that freedom; to protect your freedom, GPLv3 forbids tivoization.
Doesn't GPLv3 have a loop hole that allows running software from the cloud and virtually making it closed source? And I think that's patched on (A)GPLv3
But that's beside the point, what are we going to do when Stallman dies is the biggest issue.
GPLv3 applies to software that is distributed to users, and SaaSS malware is not distributed to users. To prevent your code being used in SaaSS malware is indeed why AGPLv3 exists. If we had a good answer to post-Stallman, removing "any later version" >>7984
from your own projects wouldn't be so pressing.
The phrase "too good for this world" has become something of a meme, but I think it unironically applies to Stallman. He's so uncompromisingly principled and guileless that it causes him crippling social dysfunction.
He's one of the most selfless people to ever live. Not only launching GNU and fighting for our freedoms, which has been a massive success, but as you can see on his website, campaigning for all manner of human rights causes day in and day out for decades.
He desired one thing for himself, someone in his life to share his interests with, while being too autistic to understand he can never have it while inhabiting the body of a gross old fat man. And what did he get for it? Thousands of people trying to burn his life's work to the ground, even at the risk of their own enslavement to corporate tyranny and state surveillance.
>even at the risk of their own enslavement to corporate tyranny and state surveillance
<because they are agents of "corporate tyranny and state surveillance"
What's wrong with this?
>>8128>Woman propositions Stallman for causal sex, gets jealous over his intense platonic relationship with another woman
whoa, slow down, chad.
The more I learn about Stallman's social life, the less respect I have for him. I thought he was an antisocial shut-in like me, turns out he is a party animal and a womanizer.
They're trying to cancel him because he gets all the ladies
https://www.fsf.org/news/fsf-board-frequently-asked-questions-faq> The FSF does not depend on large single sources of funding. It accepts and appreciates support from corporations who want to give back by contributing to the development and advocacy for free software, but direct corporate support accounted for less than 3% of FSF revenue in its most recently audited fiscal year.> The vast majority of FSF’s financial support comes from individuals – many, but not all, of whom choose to become associate members. At this moment, the FSF has more associate members than at any time in its history.
Looks like this whole fiasco only made the FSF stronger.
>>8002>how to resist corporate hell in the computing world
People already tried to at the time of goobergate before it was completely taken over by /pol/ and Brietbart.
There were the same issues with the witch-hunt for the guy who apparently made a joke about forking someone's repo and dongles.
Left-wingers were completely on the woke side then and shitting on anyone who wouldn't "listen and believe women".
They did the same when Linus was pressured into adding some pointless CoC that could be used to witch hunt any Linux contributor that the wokies didn't like, and lefties were all on board with Sarah Sharp then too.
They immediately turn into simps deathly scared of offending m'lady whenever this tactic is used about "techbro misogynists".
This has been going on for a while and it has become entrenched. RMS has no successor. After him, free software is going to devolve into a shitty corporate farm of coder slaves who will release things under corporate-friendly licences like MIT/BSD to pad their resumes and hopefully be given a position at Apple or Microsoft.
FSF member gang gangaccelerationAcceleration
Here is an entire thread of leftypol comrades downplaying the effects of this same kind of woke bullshit that rms is dealing with.
For people who care about free software, the current left-wing of american politics doesn't seem like an ally at all.
It's a shit show. Braindead idpol or ancap nutters. Can't say I have a solution, but anyone who thinks the AOC-types are an ally is not a communist.slavojSlavoj
>>8236>reeee muh SJWs>NOOOO YOU ARE TROLLING MEEEE
Holy shit kill everyone in that thread
>B-but sjws are a harmless distraction who are only built up into bogeymen by polfags!
Reminder that the real battle is not between left vs right, but normalfags vs autists..
And we're on the side of normalfags because they're the working class, right?
Normalfags are useless technolumpens
Aren't normalfags successful capitalists?
View -> Page Style -> No Style
However, while visually equivalent, for dev purposes the latter retains style attributes of elements and prevents their application, e.g. Unique IPs
, while the former removes style attributes of elements.
Array.from (document.querySelectorAll ("*")).filter (e => e.hasAttribute ("style")).length
Unique IPs: 3