amszmidt · HackerTrans

amszmidt

hace 13 díasdiscuss

Would love to see some statistics on that.

amszmidt

hace 26 díasdiscuss

It is also capable of doing it over the wire.

amszmidt

hace 26 díasdiscuss

Fun fact. DIRED pre-dates EMACS.

DIRED on ITS is also similar enough to today’s DIRED.

amszmidt

hace 2 mesesdiscuss

But it is. There is a link to the original text at the bottom of the translation.

amszmidt

hace 2 mesesdiscuss

The details of lexical scope where defined in Algol 60 (1960), nearly 2 decades before Rabbit (1978).

People did know how to implement things back then, and TeX is a great example of that. It is just our definitions have changed over the years of what we consider better.

amszmidt

hace 3 mesesdiscuss

This a common thing shared with the Nordics. The English term would be “meteorological spring”.

https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%A5r_i_Sverige

The definition would certainly work in English countries, seeing it is just 0 to 10 degrees Celsius average over the course of a week (and after 15th of February).

amszmidt

hace 3 mesesdiscuss

Would be nice if someone did it with Swedens laws too!

amszmidt

hace 4 mesesdiscuss

In Sweden, you're allowed to film/photograph in public without the need for any consent.

There is (in general) no expectation of privacy in public in Europe. How you can use the material though, is a different matter ...

amszmidt

hace 5 mesesdiscuss

Not if it is an alias.

amszmidt

hace 5 mesesdiscuss

It was suggested by Tom Lord (RIP), who used it heavily long before he wrote GNU Arch.

File names or directories starting with a comma where considered “junk”, and ones with a plus sign I think where considered “precious”.

amszmidt

hace 7 mesesdiscuss

Thanks for the link; sadly none of the links to the repo can be viewed to see what exactly occurred.

To those downvoting, curious why? Many of the links are not viewable, since GitHub hides them, so any discussion becomes quite tricky.

amszmidt

hace 7 mesesdiscuss

Incorporating compatible code, under different license is perfectly OK and each work can have different license, while the whole combined work is under the terms of another.

I'm honestly quite confused what FFmpeg is objecting to here, if ILoveRockchip wrote code, under a compatible license (which Apache 2.0 is wrt. LGPLv2+ which FFmpeg is licensed under) -- then that seems perfectly fine.

The repository in question is of course gone. Is it that ILoveRockchip claims that they wrote code that was written FFmpeg? That is bad, and unrelated to any license terms, or license compatibility ... just outright plagiarism.

amszmidt

hace 8 mesesdiscuss

I think maybe you're mixing up distribution and running a program, at least taking your initial comment into account, "if you train/run/use a model, it must be open source".

amszmidt

hace 8 mesesdiscuss

In the context of Free Software, yes. Freedom one is about the right to study a program.

amszmidt

hace 8 mesesdiscuss

That is not really correct, the GNU GPL doesn't have any terms whatsoever on how you can use, or modify the program to do things. You're free to make a GNU GPL program do anything (i.e., use).

I suggest a careful reading of the GNU GPL, or the definition of Free Software, where this is carefully explained.

amszmidt

hace 8 mesesdiscuss

Because it would violate freedom zero. Adding such terms to the GNU GPL would also mean that you can remove them, they would be considered "further restrictions" and can be removed (see section 7 of the GNU GPL version 3).

amszmidt

hace 8 mesesdiscuss

It isn't the difficult, a license that forbids how the program is used is a non-free software license.

"The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0)."

amszmidt

hace 8 mesesdiscuss

An employee doesn’t act as an official representative of their employer nor do they speak for the employee in any official capacity. That is what the message says.

The informal also didn’t cloak their identity (implies some malicious intent), they simple did not use their work email. Nothing wrong with that.

amszmidt

hace 8 mesesdiscuss

”No association” and “I am not a representative” are quite different things to say.

amszmidt

hace 8 mesesdiscuss

> Wait a sec. IANAL, but if I license something to you under the GPLv3, you may not license it to someone else under AGPLv3 or a commercial license.

Not exactly the above case, but from the GNU GPL version 3 (https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.txt):

      13. Use with the GNU Affero General Public License.
    
      Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, you have
    permission to link or combine any covered work with a work licensed
    under version 3 of the GNU Affero General Public License into a single
    combined work, and to convey the resulting work.  The terms of this
    License will continue to apply to the part which is the covered work,
    but the special requirements of the GNU Affero General Public License,
    section 13, concerning interaction through a network will apply to the
    combination as such.

comments