smug prick.
I was going for sarcasm, but i can see the interpretational difference.
I suppose game recognises game.
“On this site, they are one and the same.” sounds like something condescending, smug prick might say as an opener.
but by all means, tell me more about what everyone on this public forum thinks.
TL;DR;
Sounds like a bunch of organisational issues using licensing as a scapegoat.
Again, not giving an opinion on FOSS licencing pro’s and cons, just on the implementation of licensing in general.
My issue with viral licensing is that it means you got to rewrite the code or use another product.
Or…comply with the licence.
but yes, that’s entirely the intention of a licence.
You can use this thing as long as you adhere to the rules set forth, if you don’t want to then feel free to create your own or find something with a licence more to your liking.
They aren’t forcing this on you, using these products is optional.
Also software bom is a hassle.
Absolutely.
However, that feels more like a procurement/evaluation issue.
e.g : “is bringing in this open source, viral GPL audio processing library worth the trade-off of dealing with the compliance vs paying money for a similar commercial product (or building our own)”
Some advanced manufacturing techniques rely on advanced software. So does infrastructure which is often only secured by obscurity. Also all software is filled with vulnerabilities which can get easier to exploit if you have access to the source code.
That sounds again like a person or persons have royally fucked up their evaluation/procurement duties when selecting the components to use in the building of the product a, quality/security/systems design issue rather than a licensing one.
if complying with an open source license causes a product to become a danger to the public, many people, at many stages, have utterly failed to do their job.
Also,i’m sure you know this, but security through obscurity is a poor systems design choice in almost all scenarios.
As you say though, it does happen in the real world.
In those cases someone needs to wear the grown up hat and evaluate the options available, such as removing or replacing the component that requires opening up your source code, or evaluating the trade off of how severe a risk opening up the source code is vs the costs involved in replacing it, or even the potential legal liability of just ignoring the licence.
If you can’t afford any options then your product isn’t viable ( in an “everybody follows the rules” kind of scenario, at least).
Im not expressing an opinion on the viral nature of the licence itself, nor the pros and cons of FOSS, nor am I a FOSS evangelist of any kind.
But you understand it’s optional right? if you don’t like it, don’t use it.
This isn’t some gotcha, you can literally decide not to use the thing under the licence you don’t like. That will solve 100% of the problems you are describing (though it sounds like it’d introduce new, non-licence based problems in whatever example you are thinking of)
Well… I say that, but im actually not sure what you mean by “dangerous to the public”, if you could go in to a bit more detail about what you mean there, I’d appreciate it
You mean to say that people on this site are claiming that individuals with publicly stated agendas and goals might possibly use the fiscal and/or reputational benefits of the organisations they control to aid in the furthering whatever goals/agendas they may have?
Point me in their direction, i shall have words…big ones…like wherewithal …or extrapolation…prestidigitation…etc.
Clearly these people are buttering their toast with a teaspoon, seems like an incredible leap to me and i bet they couldn’t even provide a single example of this happening in the modern day…illogical plebeians.
I see what you mean and for jobs where deceit isn’t an asset it’s probably not a great idea to get caught lying.
I will say though, having been employed, the ability to “gracefully massage” the truth is an invaluable skill in a lot of workplaces.
Cheating is absolutely a sellable skill.
The difference is in the potential for creep.
The proposed implementation would actually be less invasive than a national ID card (assuming the implementation information provided is complete and accurate), but also usable in less scenarios.
AFAICT there is no provision for actually verifying the person using the app is the person who’s identity is verified in the app.
What’s to stop one person having a verified identity and just sharing it with the people around them once it’s been issued ?
As an example, with an ID card in a bar you need to match the photo, this digital system would be like turning up to a bar with an ID that had no picture or details on , but just said “over 18”, you could then hand this to a friend and they could also use it.
I personally think that if a system is mandatory then an easily circumventable verification system is the best choice , but such an easily circumventable system is exactly the kind of thing governments have used as an excuse to push for further encroachment.
Take the UK for example, the online safety act they have is easily circumvented with a VPN (which many people noted before it was implemented) the government basically stuck their head in the sand and claimed vpn’s weren’t widespread enough to be a problem.
Skip to now and they’ve got representatives looking to force vpn compliance with the online safety act without having the slightest clue about why that wouldn’t and can’t work the way they want.
A more suspicious person might suspect the attack on vpn usage was an expected part of the overall plan.
Even a less suspicious person could still see the direct line from one to the other.
I’m not saying they will, but if i were a betting person, I’d certainly put some money on it.
Yes, i get that, copilot is like opencode or cursor, though perhaps with less general access to models.
There was a reply
Copilot? You mean the AI with terms of service that are in bold and explicit: “for entertainment purposes only”?
followed by
I suppose GitHub Copilot is meant, which is a different thing.
i was asking why github copilot is different in that context.
There are many such projects that have done similar things that aren’t getting the attention this one has.
The reason this one it getting the attention it is, is because of the replies and behaviour of the dev.
Ok, so there are 70-81 copilots, github is one of them.
Why is github copilot a different thing in the context of the reply that was being responded to ?
Different how, isn’t github owned by microsoft ?
If you’re stuck at review you aren’t seeing 10x development, you’re seeing 10x code generation.
This is especially important because without the review/test/deploy part of the pipeline you aren’t actually seeing any progress towards business goals.
Once you do get these parts sorted, you can then look at what multiplier you’re seeing.
That’s not to say there isn’t an improvement in your workflow, just that you can’t say with any certainty what kind of improvement without measuring the end to end.
It might turn out that the rest of the pipeline is way easier , in which case your multiplier will be higher, it might also be much harder, in which case the multiplier will be lower.
I’m not taking shots, i mean it seriously, especially if you need to report any of this to the rest of the business.
edit : In addition, if it turns out that review is going to be a bottleneck you can get extra resource pointed in that direction which will benefit the workflow overall.
another edit: i would consider correctly managing the expectations of those you report to as a vital skill.
Yeah my bad, crash to desktop, or in the case of the switch, crash to homescreen
I used effectual equivalent for a reason.
I did say it was somewhat hyperbolous but there are real life examples that are possible.
Something like extended bullying directly leading to suicide, lies with the intention of causing harm or death.
Calls to violence that lead to deaths that otherwise wouldn’t likely happen is a good example of one that can be technically correct but difficult to prove.
Intentionally telling someone a door leads to safety when it actually leads to a spike pit is effectually the same as stabbing them yourself.
Are those examples good enough for an answer?
Im looking for how the idea holds up at the logical extreme so I can understand the bounds of the theoretical context.
There doesn’t have to be a good answer either, some ideas only work in a limited boundary and break down at the extremes.
I know its a hyperbolic example (though entirely possible in the context you describe)
What would be your thoughts on speech that had the effectual equivalent of murder?
There’s no traps here im just interested in the thought process behind the context you provided.
Side note: if verbal violence is possible then it would probably track that there are degrees of violence, much like the physical equivalent.
If that’s true the argument that you shouldn’t regulate subjectively heavy violence because “who here hasn’t physically hurt someone?” Isn’t a reasonable as it sounds at first glance.
For the record, Rowling is a shitbag, the potter books are mediocre and the actors were the best thing about the movies.
None of that bias is in the foundation of my questions though.
i played this game hard for a while, but there were so many CTD progress reverting bugs that it finally killed my enthusiasm for it.
i’m not utilising it nearly as much as i should which is why i haven’t gotten around to the failover cluster yet.
People are people, manage your expectations accordingly.
These kinds of federated services were never meant to be better than reddit in a content sense, all they do is provide a system in which the possibility a subjectively better platform was possible.
More simply, federated services are about federation/decentralisation.
The idiomatic solution to the problem you’re describing is either to:
start your own federated instance, with the prerequisite amount of hookers and blackjack, but also sufficient rules and moderational enforcement to adhere to your expectations of what a better reddit looks like.
or
find an instance that already does this and join it.
This is a thing that is possible in a federated service, which is the actual difference between reddit and lemmy/piefed etc