netzego

probably one should start with implementing systemd in GNU/Emacs..

It's right there :)

`Test 15 : Detection of artificial colour in turmeric powder`

- [1] https://eatrightindia.gov.in/dart/

For testing i prefer systemd-nspawn containers with mkosi. A neat tool for running your other fav. distro in a terminal. Works like a charm and integrates nicely in your system. Eg. logs and systemd services or CI testing.

- https://github.com/systemd/mkosi

- man:systemd-nspawn(1)

- man:machinectl(1)

That bit friendly fraud must stay profitable. Otherwise the enemy would do it for half the price! And besides, they just protected their jobs. That reasonable and everybody would have done this!!

'In an example of Brandolini's law [...] "It took this guy 15 minutes to make his video and it took me three days to fact-check."' [1]

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law

"A panel of low-vision and legally blind developers provided feedback at each stage of design"

I used the medium style for two hours at pretty small font-size (8pt) on a light background. And i must say i kind of liked it so far. The greater line height and letter spacing looks good on smaller sizes. On greater font-sizes the letters getting to much "personality" and the font start to feel out of bounds. It is as easy to read as my preferred font but in smaller sizes. Which is appreciated. Not sure if really want to switch, though.

"Atlas Typewriter, a companion monospaced family also in six weights" [1]

[1] https://commercialtype.com/news/atlas_grotesk_typewriter

On a (narrow) monotype font, it's pretty hard to make the capital 'O' wide/round enough, isn't it?

"Can i use this" badges for cross browser features

[Green] If you see the green Baseline badge, then you can trust that the feature will work in the browsers' latest and previous major releases.

[Yellow] If you see a yellow badge showing that a feature is not yet Baseline, then do more research and testing with your site's users before relying on that feature, or wait for it to become Baseline.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Baseline/C...

not mine but wikipedia definition. you can fight with the wikipedia guys about yours. good luck with it.

Question: Why not call your self an open-core founder? My point is, a license model should not be abused an advertisement term. The definition of open-source is pretty straight forward. Also the term open-core. And i do not agree, that is doesn't change that much. From a marketing standpoint, it really does. As the term "open-core" is so much weaker than "open-source". It is a HUGE hassle so sell this, instead of the other. And is classical wording BS and the wrong label as the open-core is much more precise. At least for me, i would not have clicked on this if labeled open-core. I guess that is why projects don't want to do it. But even worse, and that is why i think it is footgun, after reading the actual license terms, i felt fooled and leaving for ever. And that's sad part of this story.

F

"The concept of open-core software has proven to be controversial, as many developers do not consider the business model to be true open-source software. Despite this, open-core models are used by many [...] software companies." [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-core_model

I rather go with this definition. Opensource != opencore. Despite this, you're right, that is the license for `ee` folder.

"[...] it is forbidden to copy, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell the Software." [1]

"Open source is source code that is made freely available for possible modification and redistribution." [2]

[1] https://github.com/supertokens/supertokens-core/blob/master/...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source

This "[...] sends a strong message to [other] digital platforms [...]" that it is not possible to compete with any FAANG at these shady business battlefields. But these so called "penalties" just solidify these monopolies by raising the bar too high for everybody else but them. Virtue signalling at it's best.

That is only right if we completely ignore the cost of the final disposal and such. As always in this calculations they forget to add the cost for the 15.7 billion years of nuclear waste maintenance. If we talk about the cost for the normal consumers (tax payers) this must be included. Don't you think? But if we do the profit talk, you're totally right. What a fantastic business model this is, isn't it?

Pretty sure? Like it is gut feeling? If you can read German, here you can find an article from the Linke party. There are several of links to papers from the German government to the cost of that mess. I don't want to offend you, but your comment has really no value and also is wrong.

https://www.hubertus-zdebel.de/atommuell-kommt-teuer-offizie...

Also ignoring the cost of cooling water they take for free from rivers and habitats. As half of the German water consumption are used for cooling gas, coil and atom facilities. As stated in this article.

"In Deutschland zum Beispiel geht etwa die Hälfte des gesamten Wasserverbrauchs für das Kühlen der Atom-, Kohle- und Gaskraftwerke drauf [...]"

https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Krisenstab-eingesetzt-Atomd...

It is simply not true that non paying users "giving nothing" and therefore can't "expect nothing". I always wonder, where were these tech companies now if they started with that castrated service in the first place? Would you consider paying for git web service, no one ever heard about it? All these "cheap" users were making it possible to be greedy now. These companies just exploiting their network effect, well knowing their are now "to big to fail". "As of August 2022 GitLab has a market cap of $10.09 Billion." [https://companiesmarketcap.com/gitlab/marketcap/]. GitLab you'll get your cake so cry gentle.