You’re using “open source” as defined by OSI. Just wanted to note that open source historically arose in protest to the corporate walled gardens that dominated the software ecosystem, rather than a movement to give companies a large eco-system of free-to-use software for profit. It was about individuals having access.

But I am not going to argue that what I am proposing is open source. I will accept that open source as a term has already been coopted to serve corporations.

forces you to share the code, even when it is not deployed

It would only apply to for-profit entities. It would be extremely difficult to enforce on an individual level anyways, and it would disagree with the spirit here.

forces you to pay a tithe to the developer.

I called that profit sharing earlier, but you can call it that too, sure.

isn’t that similar to gpl?

That is correct. GPL has the same problem.

why should the company’s profit go to a developer they don’t employ?

I dont agree with the idea that paying non-employees is a foreign concept. Many companies pay, for example, Adobe for Adobe suite software, or Google for Google suite software, despite not hiring them as employees. They pay rent to property owners despite not hiring them as employees. The idea that only employees must be paid is unfounded.

Now, to answer “why should they pay them”, well, in exchange for their labor.

I haven’t looked into it, but I will. My only worry is that it will discourage many people from it due to political biases against the naming.

Not good enough. Companies are still allowed to use this software freely, make massive profits without anything going to the developer. It is truly free labor.

They are even allowed to modify it, even make derivative work, without open sourcing it, as long as they don’t distribute said derivative work.

It really saddens me to see so many evil people live long happy lives, then see victims of abuse and struggle like her die so young 😔. I truly wish there’s an afterlife to bring us justice.

I really was hoping that taking out Veenzuela’s head of state wasn’t enough to cause such a large shift in Venezuela, but unfortunately it did.

This is good data, but unfortunately the write up obfuscates it, and is seemingly AI generated. If you prefer not to spend the time on a write up, I recommend you just publish the data table only. The write up did not add any substance to your otherwise great work.

Not only that, they have historically refused deals to purchase military equipment, and have always preferred purchasing technology so they can make it themselves.

Unfortunately the US cares little about cost. But what Iran has in its advantage is the throughout at which it can produce this stuff. The US may not be able to make THAADs and Patriots and ship them to the gulf and Israel fast enough to match Iran’s potential production throughput.

But given the US and Israel chose to start this fight, I imagine they are willing to take that risk and have something cooking in mind.

But aren’t seedboxes more expensive? Why prefer them?

deleted by creator

Tbh I don’t know what gamescope is, but I’ll look into that and try it out to see. Thanks!

I thought about trying it out, didn’t get to it yet. I will now. Thanks!

It’s Gentoo. That could be possible, maybe something to do with the open vs non-open variant. I will look into it.

I wouldn’t call sway a custom WM, it uses wlroots which has become a standard.

Though I agree that wlroots seem to vary significantly in results with gnome and KDE based Wayland.

Thanks for your response. Your argument is convincing and I have no refutation, I appreciate you taking the time.

The only thing I would say is I bet this is still fixable with policy without having to ban or restrict immigration. But alas, that’s a different discussion, and your point that there are valid non racist reasons to criticize immigration is correct. Thanks again!

Thanks for your response! You are making an assumption that most or all immigrants wish they didn’t have to immigrate. I will answer assuming this is true, though I am not confident it is. But let’s go with it.

Changes in material conditions of a country typically occur due to political action. That may be in terms of voting, political movements, or outside forces like war or sanctions. Addressing each of those:

1. Immigrants typically can still vote, so no issue here
2. immigrants are unlikely to affect political movements when they are immigrating for reasons like work, study, reuniting with other family, or enjoying lifestyle of another country.
3. Immigrants have little to no effect on wars and sanctions.

And last, even if what you quoted is true, I bet whoever said it is likely not considering putting the effort of making their country better in the same way they want immigrants to. Maybe that’s not one of the worse forms of racism, but it is one.

Thanks for a thoughtful response. My thoughts:

1. In most cases, illegal immigrants do not benefit from government welfare programs, but they do work and contribute to the economy positively.
2. In cases where data has been collected, immigrant populations tend to put more into the economy than take through social programs, when compared with native populations. I can provide sources and data on this if you’d like.
3. Illegal immigrants may often not pay income tax, but they do pay most other forms of taxes that still end up paying more into the system than they get back. I can also provide evidence on this if you’d like.
4. If tax isn’t being collected from someone, when they’re willing to pay it, that is 100% the fault of anti-immigration policy, not an immigration issue.

When working with git, and I have a separate working copy, my options to sync are either rebase or create a merge commit.

It sounds to me like the pijul workflow is almost equivalent to just doing a merge commit instead of rebasing. Am I correct here? What’s the difference then?

It’s hard to understand what exactly will change for me if I used pijul vs git. What will be noticeably different?