cultural reviewer and dabbler in stylistic premonitions
there is a thread about the moderation of this thread here.
Thanks for editing, but I deleted your comment anyway because it was still just recommending something that is not open source.
fyi there is a thread here discussing the moderation of this thread.
half the comments in the thread were about a non-open-source product made a company which once deceptively marketed its software as open source (but has since stopped doing that).
quite often when that company comes up, a bunch of vocal fans of their youtube celebrity show up to derail discussions to bizarrely insist that their software is open source when it is obviously not.
The good news is that (sometime last year, long after you posted this) futo finally agreed to stop calling their license “open source”; unfortunately there are still some vocal fans of theirs arguing in various forums that it is.
Futo is not open source, as they (now, finally) even admit themselves: https://www.futo.org/about/futo-statement-on-opensource/
See also https://opensource.org/osd and https://opensource.org/authority and compare it to Futo’s licenses; there are (at least) three reasons it doesn’t qualify, can you spot them all? (rhetorical question; don’t @ me)
I am locking this thread to avoid needing to remove misinformation and advocacy from Futo fans who think they should be allowed to redefine a term which there has been consensus about the definition of since before they were born.
even if it’s from its own repository, it is still on F-droid
There is nothing to stop anyone from running their own f-droid repo and distributing non-free software through it, which is what futo is doing.
seems open source enough
This is the definition. Compare it with Futo’s license; it fails to meet both the Open Source Definition and Free Software Definition in several ways. After insisting they could redefine the term for a while (despite the definition’s wide acceptance) and inspiring some of their very vocal fans to promulgate their dishonest argument on their behalf, Futo themselves finally came around and agreed to stop calling their software open source.
you just can’t understand what open-source means
FYI, nearly everyone (including Futo themselves), except for some Futo fans like yourself who haven’t gotten the memo, agrees that this is the definition of “open source” (and Futo’s license obviously does not qualify).
Other comments in this thread suggesting that Futo keyboard is open source have been deleted as offtopic.
What the people here saying this “seems legit” are really saying is that, if the site is providing DRM content which you want to see, then it is indeed using this for its intended purpose (which is to prevent you from recording and/or retransmitting the stream). This is true, but, it doesn’t mean that the site isn’t also collecting your device identifiers and using them for some nefarious privacy-invasive purposes. And of course, they most likely are.
So if I were you I would look for a pirated streaming website instead of running this proprietary software to watch a DRM’d stream. (The pirated site will probably also be privacy-invasive, but they won’t get your device ID… and you’re more likely to be able to block its ads.)
he’s not been going around spouting stuff about people’s races making them superior or inferior to others
you mean like this? https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-white-supremacy-racehorse-theory-1064928/
The server isn’t exposed to the internet. It’s a local IMAP server.
if it is processing emails that originate from the internet, it is exposed to the internet
security updates are for cowards, amirite? 😂
seriously though, Debian 7 stopped receiving security updates a couple of years prior to the last time you rebooted, and there have been a lot of exploitable vulnerabilities fixed between then and now. do your family a favor and replace that mailserver!
From the 2006 modification times, i wonder: did you actually start off with a 3.1 (sarge) install and upgrade it to 7 (wheezy) and then stopped upgrading at some point? if so, personally i would be tempted to try continuing to upgrade it all the way to bookworm, just to marvel at debian stable’s stability… but only after moving its services to a fresh system :)
Any confirmation this is real? The donate button goes to GoFundMe.
username checks out
As a leftist myself (communist), I generally enjoy the content and discussions on Lemmy.
some of the privacy messengers here (like Briar) have blogging/forum features
many people incorrectly assume briar aims to provide some sort of anonymity, because it uses tor onion services and is a self-described “secure messenger”. however, that is not the case:
https://code.briarproject.org/briar/briar/-/wikis/FAQ#does-briar-provide-anonymity (answer: no)
tldr: briar contacts, even when only actually using onions, exchange their bluetoooth MAC addresses and their most recent IPv6 link-local address and last five IPv4 addresses briar has seen bound to their wlan interfaces, just in case you’re ever physically near a contact and want to automatically connect to them locally.
I asked this question the other day if I could somehow input my handwritten notes into programs like Trilium (or logseq whatever) and memos. OCR/HCR seems to far behind still so I am unsure.
I just left this comment on your post.
Via the pine64 blog update about their e-ink tablet TIL about inkput (using OnlineHTR) which appears to be a step in the right direction.
I disagree, the headline is clickbaity and implies that there is some ongoing conflict. The fact that the Fedora flatpak package maintainer pushed an update marking it EOL, with “The Fedora Flatpak build of obs-studio may have limited functionality compared to other sources. Please do not report bugs to the OBS Studio project about this build.” in the
end-of-life
metadata field the day before this article was written is not mentioned until the second-to-last sentence of it. (And the OBS maintainer has since said “For the moment, the EOL notice is sufficient enough to distance ourselves from the package that a full rebrand is not necessary at this time, as we would rather you focus efforts on the long-term goal and understand what that is.”)The article also doesn’t answer lots of questions such as:
Note again that OBS’s official flathub flatpak is also marked EOL currently, due to depending on an EOL runtime. Also, from the discussion here it is clear that simply removing the package (as the OBS dev actually requested) instead of marking it EOL (as they did) would leave current users continuing to use it and unwittingly missing all future updates. (I think that may also be the outcome of marking it EOL too? it seems like flatpak maybe needs to get some way to signal to users that they should uninstall an EOL package at update time, and/or inform them of a different package which replaces one they have installed.)
TLDR: this is all a mess, but, contrary to what the article might lead people to believe, the OBS devs and Fedora devs appear to be working together in good faith to do the best thing for their users. The legal threat (which was just in an issue comment, not sent formally by lawyers) was only made because Fedora was initially non-responsive, but they became responsive prior to this article being written.