At this point I consume most media literally on my computer or my phone, but I still want there to be a good solution for a big living room TV (50"+ range). I have yet to see any reasonable ‘computer monitor’ option for that.
The other problem with using a monitor as a TV, BTW, is that they often don’t have built-in speakers.
Gather a lot of mint, put it in your cave in a pile, and lay down on it before going to sleep for the winter.
Buying the TV and then not connecting it still rewards the bad behavior.
We have to boycott these fucks and lobby to get the behavior outlawed.
This is why, for years, I’ve been trying to point out that “if you don’t like it, just don’t buy it” isn’t good enough. Boycotts aren’t enough; we have to force the law to change to prohibit the abusive corporate behavior.
I used to recommend Sceptre, but even they appear to have stopped making dumb TVs now too.
That’s a good point: it’s not just that LLMs fail to give you an optimal password, it’s that they’re inherently designed to give you a pessimal one.
Guess that makes me the North Atlantic temperature anomaly. 'cause I’m getting more unstable but not more hot.
Never kill yourself for something that’s somebody else’s fault.
Yes we fucking can! We can absolutely blame shitty people for trying to do shitty things, and suing an archive for archiving is one of 'em!
https://landlordsgame.info/games/lgp-1932/lgp-1932_rules.pdf
Scroll down to the “prosperity” section. You’re welcome.
This isn’t about Americans’ obligation to pay. It’s about hassle being forced upon foreign companies that have fuck-all to do with America (except for having American expat customers), to make them help collect the taxes on the US’ behalf.
Creating more mainstream use-cases is how you get people to donate more bandwidth.
Still has a stupid Windows logo on the super key, though.
TIL Cueball is Alton Brown.
There’s a real easy solution to this: use strong copyleft instead of permissive licensing, and don’t require copyright assignment. You won’t be able to rug-pull even if you wanted to!
When project founders refuse to do that, well, now we know their true intentions.
Which is only possible for those who can afford to be, because their privilege insulates them from the consequences.
“I’m not political” is an expression of privilege. It disingenuously pretends to be ideologically neutral, but it’s not.
In this hypothetical situation would there be any point in licensing that code under the LGPL? No, there wouldn’t be, because it wouldn’t be possible to be enforced.
There would be exactly equally as much point in licensing it under the LGPL as there would be under anything else (in particular: including the MIT license they apparently actually chose). If their argument were really that AI makes it uncopyrightable, they would’ve claimed it to be in the Public Domain rather than attempting to apply any license at all.
So obviously, that can’t be their argument. Their only possible argument has to be that AI magically lets them launder out the copyleft and make it permissive instead, which is straight-up obvious bullshit.
More to the point, you weren’t speaking hypothetically about what they might’ve thought. You were speaking concretely about what you thought. Read it again:
LGPL is unenforceable with AI-generated code.
That’s what you said. Not “the devs claim the LGPL is unenforceable with AI-generated code,” or “hypothetically maybe somebody could argue that the LGPL is unenforceable with AI-generated code” or anything like that. Nope, you just made a straight-up unambiguous claim on your own behalf, full stop.
Your follow-up could be “whoops, I didn’t mean to say that,” but it cannot be “you misunderstood me.” What you wrote was very unambiguous. Don’t insult us by trying to pretend we read it wrong.
No, your writing wasn’t ambiguous. If you meant to relay their claim rather than making the claim yourself, you just straight-up misspoke because what you wrote was unambiguously the latter.
Yep, do it.
(Posted from a Pixel 7 running GrapheneOS)