jcstryker

Time to IPO before the rest of market catches on.

And moving to the next vendor that hopefully does a better job of staying out of the public eye...

That justification isn't as commenable as you frame it.

The same biological impulse fuels the rampant nepotism and open corruption we seem to selectively whinge about online these days.

Fair Source and Enterprise

Yet another bait and switch plays out - build clout on the goodwill of open source and execute the plan at the opportune moment.

I may understand the decision but I sure as hell don't respect it - cashing out and prioritizing your family, a very human thing to do, at a glance it almost even seems noble.

Great work! A window into one of the most important universe we have created.

Any chance you would be willing to share the source code?

This marketing strategy is getting tiring, every model is more dangerous than the next...

Playing on fear instead of the bright future you are opening up for us all is not the feeling I would want to leave the public with

Curious to see if this ends up increasing the userbase and TikTok's foothold in American culture.

https://github.com/anyproto/anytype-ts/blob/main/LICENSE.md

this appears to be source available not open source

That condition is not in the spirit or commonly accepted definition of open source.

https://kubernetes.io/docs/home/

Kubernetes for sure. When anyone asks for a good place to get started with understanding k8s - I tell them the docs should be all you need, then go get hands on.

The stuff is world class.

The limit does seem arbitrary, but just as a sanity check doesn't 50MB seem like a absurd size for a web application...?

Like Protonmail, but less sketch.

https://tutanota.com/

Love to see the competition between the projects trying to get linux running on the m1. Though I think they will hit a wall trying to enable GPU support.

I think opening up just enough to enable this effort also serves as some good nerd marketing for Apple. This race keeps the m1 in the news regularly, giving hope to those who want a low-power and performant ARM machine that wouldn't otherwise consider an apple machine.

So pardons are for sale to the wealthy or well-connected. Maybe this has always been the case, but to see it so blatant...

The power of pardon simply further reduces the trust and legitimacy of the executive branch. At least for humans it should be revoked, I think we can still trust the presidency with the power to pardon turkeys.

Feels like we are quickly centralizing consumer chip fabrication into a single company. I guess the barrier for entry is so high and TSMC is just so far ahead.

Last few things missing for me to make the switch are: tree-style/nested vertical tabs (https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/464) and firefox style per-tab sessions (https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/34)

Really excited to see brave adding native IPFS support, though I would hope the team could start dedicating some cycles to some of these core features that firefox has over them.

The MS account switcher is also terrible. Maybe it’s because I have a mix of outlook-based emails, Azure AD emails, and full O365 emails, but the fact that you can’t easily open an outlook tab for each account is horrible UX.

Since you are in the DC area I can plug the DC Code & Coffee[0] and their sister meetup NoVA Code & Coffee[1]. Both are great, active biweekly meetups with around 40-60 attendees each time. Its not just for software engineers, we get data science, devops, security, etc. people coming in. Even people not in tech but looking to make a switch. Its a lot of fun actually.

[0] https://www.meetup.com/dc-code-coffee/

[1] https://www.meetup.com/NoVA-Code-Coffee/

If true, then it is yet another example of anti-competitive behavior from Google. Reminds me of Firefox support in Hangouts.

Of course an average civilian wont be able to match the training and resources of a soldier. The idea is to raise the cost of engaging the civilian populace. No government wants to rule over piles of ruble and streets full of corpses.

Occupation is already expensive and essentially temporary. Look at the situation in Afghanistan, the US invades and occupies the country. As they begin to withdraw, territory is taken back by the Taliban and warlords, they simply bide their time and wait for an opportunity to return.

An armed populace changes the math around occupation and engaging in violence. Of course this also leads to other oppressive mechanisms like propaganda and manufacturing concent, but at least people aren't dying. Its a step in the right direction.

Absolutely agreed, and I think decentralization is a part of that. Instead of a single point of failure, spreading power between multiple groups reduces the potential damage and the incentive to corrupt a system.

Consider a treaty organization organized against a hypothetical enemy. If the adversary succeeds in corrupting and neutralizing one of the member states, that is significantly less damaging than if it were a centralized command that was corrupted.

It increases the cost dramatically to neutralize the treaty organization, and the threat to the system is easily and publicly recognized. As opposed to the slow and eventually catastrophic corruption of a centralized command.

This is a powerful argument for limited government and decentralization, requiring a simple premise that I think most people can agree with: That the protection and concealing of Jews and other groups under Nazi Germany was a just and desirable act.

Especially with the rhetoric today about creeping fascism, we should recognize that all authorities have the potential to become corrupt and oppressive. We should ensure proper checks against that and consider the potential consequences before implementing centralized services. Efficiency and cost effectiveness should not be the only consideration.

For instance, you might think that there are no potential downsides to a centralized welfare system. However what happens if those benefits are provided only to people of specific ideologies or races? What if it becomes contingent on giving up your biometric data or subject to drug testing as we have already seen in many areas of the US? Maybe we should consider the potential consequences of centralizing essential support structures and social safety nets.

How is it free software if I am unable to produce a build from the the source code that is made available. This clearly violates freedoms 0 and 1.

From the SFLC Guide:

"The Corresponding Source definition – both in GPLv2 and GPLv3 – has not been typically read to include the compiler itself, but rather things like makefiles, build scripts, and packaging scripts."

These are not provided with the source code, and they claim the distributed binaries are licensed under the GPL. How is this correct if they do not satisfy the 4 freedoms?

The project claims to be licensed under the GPL and markets itself as an open source competitor to Plex. Even if only the copyright holders have the standing to pursue a violation, that doesn't change the fact that they are falsely advertising their project and are not following their own selected license.

They distribute packages for Linux distro's, where the GPL is listed as the license for the package, instead they should be listed as custom or proprietary.

Unfortunate that this has been going on for over 4 months, with not even platitudes, just "we are discussing it internally".

Emby markets itself as an open source competitor to Plex, however the binaries they distribute are not reproducible using the code published in the repository. Despite multiple requests for the build scripts for the dotnet core version of Emby, the core developer Luke states "we are currently not publishing the build process for it, but don't worry, we will be doing .net core-based packages for all of the popular distros."[0]

The GPL requires the release of not just source code, but build scripts and supporting materials, outlined here in the SFLC's "A Practical Guide to GPL Compliance", sections 3.3, 3.4, 4.2.3. [1]

The core development team has been made aware of this, but is still refusing to make the build scripts available for the currently distributed version of Emby. Neither have they relicensed the project, despite all current contributions being covered under a CLA. This constitutes a willful and deliberate violation of the GPLv2.

[0] https://emby.media/community/index.php?/topic/51614-instruct...

[1] https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/compliance-gu...

This is concerning if true, would like to see more data.

This modernization initiative is an opportunity to set a standard of OSS software in the USG. It would be disappointing to see this pass, securing another round of lock-in.

I really like the look of this, though is there any way to self-host without google cloud components?

From the local devserver instructions: >gcloud components update

Looks like there isn't?