I thought FUD was a cryptobro term.

fyi: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty,_and_doubt

poe’s law exemplar 😬

Your post of the story is still up

The post they linked to is deleted, as is everything they ever posted on feddit.org, indicating that their instance ban (“reason: antisemitism”) was done with the “remove content” checkbox checked.

the non-recursive part of this image is mildlyinfuriating

Delta is the only U.S.-based mainline carrier where flight attendants, fleet service, and mechanics are not represented by a union

you could edit your post title

Have you tried https://mike-fabian.github.io/ibus-typing-booster/ ?

I have not, but I think it does what you’re looking for.

The demo video emphasizes its use as an emoji picker but it was originally created for typing Indic languages.

if that is the case I choose upper-left of the political compass for you (:

i’m curious, where do you place yourself on that compass? if you’ve got 20 minutes I highly recommend this video about it.

as a mod/admin, i would appreciate being able to edit post titles. there have been a fair number of times where i asked a poster to do so, and then waited a while for them to before deleting the post if they don’t.

and/or, it would be nice to have a way for us to temporarily semi-delete a post while waiting for OP to make requested changes to it; that is, to hide it from the community view but leave it visible to people with the URL, or people who find it via the user profiles of the poster or commenters in it.

editing titles would be a bit weird without an edit history or at least a way to see that some 2nd party had edited it, and editing post bodies would be more so. but it would make sense and be useful with an edit history, i think.

i would also appreciate having content addressability, portable identity, composable moderation, and… perhaps a pony 😂

and here i does it for free 🤡

At first i thought, wow, cool they’re still developing that? Doing a release or two a year, i see.

I used to use it long ago, and was pretty happy with it.

Nope.

Nope, it is.

It allows someone to use code without sharing the changes of that code. It enables non-free software creators like Microsoft to take the code, use it however they like, and not have to share back.

This is correct; it is a permissive license.

This is what Free Software prevents.

No, that is what copyleft (aims to) prevent.

Tired of people calling things like MIT and *BSD true libre/Free Software.

The no True Scotsman fallacy requires a lack of authority about what what constitutes “true” - but in the case of Free/Libre software, we have one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Free_Software_Definition

If you look at this license list (maintained by the Free Software Foundation’s Licensing and Compliance Lab) you’ll see that they classify many non-copyleft licenses as “permissive free software licenses”.

They’re basically one step away from no license at all.

Under the Berne Convention of 1886, everything is copyrighted by default, so “no license at all” means that nobody has permission to redistribute it :)

The differences between permissive free software licenses and CC0 or a simple declaration that something is “dedicated to the public domain” are subtle and it’s easy to see them as irrelevant, but the choice of license does have consequences.

The FSF recommends that people who want to use a permissive license choose Apache 2.0 “for substantial programs” because of its clause which “prevents patent treachery”, while noting that that clause makes it incompatible with GPLv2. For “simple programs” when the author wants a permissive license, FSF recommends the Expat license (aka the MIT license).

It is noteworthy that the latter is compatible with GPLv2; MIT-licensed programs can be included in a GPLv2-only work (like the Linux kernel) while Apache 2.0-licensed programs cannot. (GPLv3 is more accommodating and allows patent-related additional restrictions to be applied, so it is compatible with Apache 2.0.)

What is a U.S.-sanctioned place? Why does the U.S. government think this is a bad thing?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_government_sanctions

🎉 sometimes US sanctions actually do lead to positive outcomes :)

I often see Rust mentioned at the same time as MIT-type licenses. Is it just a cultural thing that people who write Rust dislike Libre licenses?

The word “libre” in the context of licensing exists to clarify the ambiguity of the word “free”, to emphasize that it means “free as in freedom” rather than “free as in beer” (aka no cost, or gratis) as the FSF explains here.

The MIT license is a “libre” license, because it does meet the Free Software Definition.

I think the word you are looking for here is copyleft: the MIT license is a permissive license, meaning it is not a copyleft license.

I don’t know enough about the Rust community to say why, but from a distance my impression is that yes they do appear to have a cultural preference for permissive licenses.

fyi: GNU coreutils are licensed GPL, not AGPL.

there is so much other confusion in this thread, i can’t even 🤦

imo the pejorative connotation of that word, and homophobia generally, is ultimately rooted in misogyny