skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The GPL does put restriction on use. If you make modification to the code and do not share those modifications, you are constrained from using the code you modified.

And those constraints are for political reasons. The Four Freedoms are a political ideology about how software, developers, and users should morally interact, and the GPL exists as a legal tool to support this political ideology.

Edit: clarification - by "use" here, I'm including "bundle it into a black box of hardware and sell that hardware."
Erasmus of Rotterdam was one of the greatest scholars of the Renaissance and certainly one of, if not the, best Latinist. His father was a priest, and so could not legally marry Erasmus' mother, who was apparently the father's housekeeper; they were not well-off. The parents died from the plague in 1483, and Erasmus was thereafter raised and educated by monks, whom he eventually joined out of poverty. He went on to become one of the most influential Latinists in history.
There was a nobility during the Renaissance, but underneath that was a churning sea of social mobility that rewarded intelligence and capability.
I usually do it by chanting "XEmacs" three times while looking into a mirror.
As someone who isn't THIS paranoid, but definitely closer to it than most, I can add a criteria for a reason one would be this paranoid. If you've worked in/with some of the agencies listed, you're not just paranoid but feel totally justified knowing exactly what some old pals can see.
Fantastic, very interesting stuff. I'm aware of some of these topics but this gives me a good roadmap of how to approach the field more generally. Thank you!
You can't consume all your information through one source or aggregator. Use multiple and introduce new ones frequently and you will have no reason to be concerned.

I also think your concerns can be addressed with just thinking and rationality. If you read something from one source and agree with it just recognise that you have some information but also recognise you don't have all the information. Keep an open mind and be skeptical. I think this is critical because you can't read enough sources on every topic.
> Free speech never implied freedom from consequences though - this isn't the government suppressing RMS, it's people reacting to his free speech and deciding that they don't like it.

Good point - looking at the petitions, it's become obvious that the people deciding they don't like RMS's speeach are in the minority.

Is it worth firing an entire board because a minority feels insecure?

On your mind, is tyranny by the minority better than tyranny by the majority?
> So, you're either forced to defend Richard Stallman and accept what's going on over there, or __YOU ARE THE ENEMY OF ALL OPEN SOURCE__.

Firstly Free software != open source, so you probably meant free software in your original quote.

Secondly, while there may be people who have legitimate concerns about RMS, the authors of the open letter have chosen not to highlight these claims but rather to rely on mischaracterisations and easily debunked lies. By supporting the open letter you are supporting these lies and thereby supporting an attack on free software.

Maybe this is not the most productive characterisation of the situation, but the creators of the open letter were the ones that chose this framing by choosing to propagate such falsehoods. We must stand up against such disingenuous actions, and can view them as none other than some kind of motivated attack on Free software.
This in an incredibly valuable Twitter thread. As an entrepreneur, you have to decide very carefully about the market you want to conquer. Or, in the words of Sun Tzu: "If a battle can't be won, don't fight it." - For companies backed by big VCs, money basically does not exist. They can spend ten dollars to earn one as long as the story of building a leading brand can be told. Vanity metrics play an important role here. The primary target is to go public to cash out. There is _no way_ winning against such a player if you're not backed the same way.
Say what you will about the man personally, but his prescience with regards to the trends of industry and its attacks on personal freedom with regards to software and hardware have been very accurate, oftentimes decades ahead of when the effects are widely understood. His disconnection from average people can sometimes be explained because of how differently he thinks about things – usually in an absolutist sense, which is very alienating.

But his contributions to the software community, even if not directly through software commits, but through advocacy and ensuring the fundamental freedoms are preserved, are still being reaped to this day.

The same thing goes for the FSF, which, having been founded by him, has a similar worldview. It may not be pragmatic towards startups that want to profit from artificial digital scarcity, but those same startups and other businesses have profited immeasurable through FSF's defense of software freedoms.

Would the world really be better off if the Microsofts, Oracles, and others of their ilk still had the same grasp on the user experience of software? Neither Android, AWS, nor countless other staples of billions of peoples' lives and livelihoods would be a thing if not for the early and ongoing defense of software freedom that the FSF has provided.
>Why are we over-complicating all of this so very hard?

What is complicated about this?

1) open charge port

2) plug in cable

3) walk away

Your system with NFC and swiping and scanning cards and chips sounds more complicated to me.

I even had to add "open charge port" and "walk away" in order to come up with 3 steps here… how much less complicated could it be?
> "Our opponents wish to destroy Free Software"

Surely if you're OK with that, that heavily implies you are an enemy of open source? I think it's quite a reasonable rephrasing.
I've had multiple dentists(including my wife) tell me not to work on certain small cavities, or to use sensodyne.

Some have been under observation for more than 20 years.

I'm also sure they have re-mineralization treatments they do on site, if it was really worth it, they'd be glad to take your money for that.

I'm sure they have exact procedures for when to work on a cavity or not.
I can see why the idea is tempting, ie testing multiple strategies and survival of the fittest. But in reality there are extreme downsides. Teams will lie and fudge data to get ahead. People dont trust their coworkers.

I think this is where strong technical leadership is needed. At some point someone needs to make a decision on the technical direction and have the conviction to stick with it.
More evidence of a leak from the virus lab, which satisfies Occam's Razor far, far better.
Ha. I came on here to post it myself this time. Turns out I was beaten to it.
You don't have to use dark web here either, the data brokers are regular companies with physical addresses and everything. It's just not common because people don't know about it, but there are no practical or legal barriers.

And I know about this from outside of the verge, I just believe in providing citations.
Here's the meat of the conclusion:

"While AMD is not currently aware of any code that would be
considered vulnerable due to PSF behavior, this whitepaper examines the potential security implications of PSF, in
general, as well as mechanisms that are designed to disable the feature if desired. AMD believes that for most
applications, the security risk of PSF is likely low and where isolation is required, techniques such as address space
isolation are preferred over software sandboxing."

"AMD recommends leaving the Predictive Store Forwarding feature enabled as the default setting."
So while I applaud the effort here, it seems to be much safer to buy a Surface Tablet and then install Ubuntu and KDE on it. I have no idea who's behind this Jing OS.

How do you make money? The tablet you're going to crowdfund is likely to be played by hardware issues as making hardware is extremely difficult on a limited budget.

What would be cool is if you wrote a script to install the OS on a tablet PC which already exist, and then either ask for donations or sell merchandise. Or, rely off app store revenue
There’s multiple angles. I think RedHat is more for PR for IBM.

I don’t think it’s binary in that RedHat is owned by a company that has other motivations than when RedHat was independent.
Or earthquake-proof reinforced concrete.
Was this inspired by Trump :)
Sound more of an attempt to discredit the rest of the open source community for not being "pure" enough.
I literally work on a device that is still uses an inittab (hopefully changing that in 2021). the only limiting factor is yourself.

1) eudev works

2) elogind works

3) you can still use sysvinit or literally the multitude of others
Investors care about profits, not growth. Growth can lead to profits, but it can also lead to bigger losses, particularly in a company without large fixed costs. Also, there are reasons to think that the market for food delivery has already peaked. Where I live it's full of "riders" everywhere, it's quite annoying. I don't know if there's any room for more growth.
/Blah
...just because it's a minority doesn't mean it's inherently wrong. At the risk of the ghost of Godwin's, black people were a minority in the 1960s, yet still had a good point about their aims.

And as for whether or not the board chooses to listen to the feedback, entirely up to them and their governance structure.
Well: http://islinuxaboutchoice.com/
There is a support letter hosted on github: https://rms-support-letter.github.io/
On pronouns?

https://stallman.org/articles/genderless-pronouns.html

On society in general?

https://stallman.org/articles/necessary-changes.html

For anything else, there's a good chance he's written about it on his website.
Not really. There are utilities that sign things (e.g. Signify) but they don't attempt to solve the difficult problem of identity management.

Also, OpenPGP is an open published standard with an extensive infrastructure of implementations. It's hard to overcome that with a new proposal.
Lots of anti-Deliveroo and anti-gig economy sentiment.

I love Deliveroo, I love the gig economy.

I've had a sprained ankle for six weeks. Without these companies my life would have been much harder.

Economic studies mostly seem to find that employees value the flexibility of the gig economy. (Feel free to tell me if I'm wrong - I'm just giving a broad-brush opinion.) It's unclear to me whether all the handwringing is coming from actual participants.

In the UK we have had very low unemployment rates for the past decade. That's good. I'm glad that people can get a first job in this way. It's true that they classify drivers as self-employed. Maybe that is because employees would have a large and expensive panoply of rules applied - some of which may benefit them, while others seem more to benefit the only-too-thriving HR industry.

I have zero desire to go back to the old days. I don't want the price of London cabs to go back to "unaffordable", to have to hunt for a dodgy minicab, or pay triple for a London taxi, which is a Mafiosic monopoly. I like being able to get food delivered. The pandemic would have sucked without it. Millions of consumers seem to agree.
Whether somebody is called he, she, or them may reasonably fluster some people, but it certainly doesn't seem to warrant something as hateful as, "the world gone absolutely batshit insane, driven by purple haired Twitter trans-extremists". To me, this stance and its wording is much more extreme and "insane" (to use your choice of insult - I would say something like "irrational").
I think the most valuable aspect of signed commits is that of also signing the contributor license agreement with the same key. This is the Apache Source Foundation's policy.
It's in the linked letters of support FTFA. There is less support for firing RMS than there is for keeping him, even though the people signing the "keep" are face negative consequences or supporting the FSF's goals.
WTF (Web Template Framework)
Red Hat is still largely independent of IBM.
> if OpenBSD suddenly got enough attention from the wider security community, including people who actively look for holes that can be exploited, there'd be plenty of important stuff found.

This seems like a structural advantage to less popular software. If your software is less common, attackers will have put less time into exploiting it, and therefore you will be more secure. My impression is that MacOS and Linux both benefited from this relative to Windows for a long time.

In general this should be true if usage grows faster than security resources for popular system. It might be still be true even with significant, commensurate investments in security while you grow, because if a small percentage of users mis-configure the software and create vulnerabilities, that population will hit a critical mass with growth regardless of your security efforts.
I'm 27.
What are you pronoun preferences for these sentences?

Someone left their laptop on the table. If they come back asking for it, ask them to describe the stickers.
Mostly general distrust in the project by the German tech scene on Twitter.

Their marketing comes with weird "trust us" vibe and the German tech scene went through these conversations already with the concept of the official app.

Add to that their attempts at transparency which are often a little too late and vague, and you have internet outrage. (With this release for example people were expecting to see server-side code, not that of the Android app everybody could already find in the apk).
I feel the exact same way. They didn't share their methodology, and their claims hinge on the methodology they used for converting the dates. I'm not accusing them of anything. I'm asking to see their methodology. You are the one who is giving them the benefit of the doubt and assuming they did it correctly, which is antithetical to peer-reviewed science.
Came here to say this. JetBrains Mono is my favourite code-font. The ligatures are excellent too.
One reason is that disparate impls of POSIX utils don't behave as similarly as one would hope. It's easy to cross the line from using flags that are guaranteed to be available to using flags and behaviors only available on your machine.

An example of a mistake I've made like this is relying on `find` on linux to default to searching the pwd if it doesn't have a positional arg. Another is `sed -i` requires a file extension on MacOS, but doesn't on Linux. You can catch these with tests to some extent, but how many people bother running their CI on MacOS just to avoid breaking other devs?

That said, I did work on a production system which happily shelled out to `dig` for DNS lookups for several years; everybody who saw it had a visceral negative reaction, but it also worked well enough that there was no good reason to spend time replacing it.
List of accidents and incidents involving helicopters
Look up "medicare accountable care"

Edit: I did it for you:

"An accountable care organization (ACO) is a healthcare organization that ties provider reimbursements to quality metrics and reductions in the cost of care"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accountable_care_organization
It’s not RMS’ duty to educate you, me and others or to reword things for our benefit.

I think it would be worse if he submitted to some struggle session and changed his posts to whatever language is approved for discussing Epstein/Minsky.
It couldn't be easier. His email is rms@gnu.org and afaik he is very good for replying.
The Linux Foundation, so Microsoft, Google, Intel, Amazon, Adobe etc.? Yeah, I'd say so. They don't have anything to do with Free Software and thus their opinion is irrelevant at best.
RedHat has been on the road it's on long before the acquisition by IBM.
> I don't see why the init system on my server has to be the same as the one on my ultrabook, because only a fraction of what they should do is shared

Well, not even the kernel should be shared —- but most of us is okay with having the same kernel, but at most configured differently. I see it the same way in the case of systemd, of course your ultra book doesn’t need I don’t know how many services, but the basics are very much the same. And to be honest, I’m happy to use the same knowledge/tools on a server machine and a laptop.

> Having one tool that covers all the use cases just sounds like a very good way to increase the attack surface.

That’s just security by obscurity...
Please deal with Harris situation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6cake3bwnY
I suppose that hinges on whether the parent was opening a broad point about life expectancy from the topic, or only talking about the adult scholars. I'm not sure which they intended, I was guessing based on their phrasing that they were targeting the broader notion of how it's commonly perceived that life expectancy has increased over that time.

Bill Gates for example routinely claims in interviews / discussions that there has been a massive gain in life expectancy (technically correct) and he'll claim that broadly (mostly false), dropping context on the fact that it's heavily caused by childhood mortality figures plunging. I've seen him do that numerous times over the years (usually he gets agitated when someone challenges him, moves into sarcastic mode, and points out the huge gains for the average person on life expectancy, which is partially bunk). It's a common point of intellectual dishonesty in the scientific & health establishment, because they want to pretend the life expectancy gains for adults have been far greater than they really have been (for their own self-interested reasons). I suspected the parent comment was riffing on that aspect, where it's a pushed point of quasi propaganda that life expectancy has soared for everyone.
Free Software is not open source and the article points that out as well.

I'm not convinced they want to destroy Free Software either however.
DoorDash accuses software partner Olo of fraud
Really good read. And what a dodgy character, in my opinion.

> The only time she has ever turned down a case for reasons of repugnance was when she refused to testify for a man accused of operating the gas chambers at Treblinka.

( ... )

> Loftus said, “I was reeling. How about the presumption of innocence? How about ‘the unpopular deserve to have a defense’?”

Maybe in the latter case, the fact that she was promised $14k made the difference? Or maybe rape isn't bad enough that you lose the presumption of innocence, and genocide is? Or maybe she just wanted to participate in something so high profile.

> “I have to admit,” she told me later, “that it is fascinating to be, you know, in the trenches with the trial of the century.”
> The GPL does put restriction on use.

No, it does not. It places restrictions on redistribution, not on use. You can use it no matter who or what you are.

> If you make modification to the code and do not share those modifications, you are constrained from using the code you modified.

Incorrect. You can modify and use it to your hearts content. You are only required to share your modifications source if you distribute the modified software.
So your students do not have a networking class where this (not the programming part) should be taught in the first place?
If this is what they used, why didn't they say that? I'm not making a claim about what method they used. I'm saying that whatever method they used is prone to error and should be included in the methodology of the paper. What is wrong with being transparent about their methodology? And what is wrong with expecting that level of transparency in a scientific paper making a specific claim?
"Our opponents wish to destroy Free Software" in massive text without highlighting any of the legitimate, less presumptive grievances with Stallman's behavior seems to be a 1:1 drop in.

Or are you concerned about their usage of open source in place of free software? They quite plainly state principles which are also shared with the open source movement are what they're defending, even not accounting for their colloquial synonyminity.
Top ranked on the classic frontpage, but not the main one. I guess this is one of those generational issues?
I wouldn't call it slander.

- Stallman is a divisive figure, with questionable opinions outside the realm of free software, opinions he published himself, willingly.

- He multiple times ignored the contributions of women, and did so after being corrected.

- Lots of women feel uncomfortable close to him due to his behavior. Some of that may be involuntary.

- The board reinstated him without an announcement, prior discussion involving the broader community. The announcement surprised everyone except the board and the host event had do clarify they were not part of it.

- He refuses to acknowledge how all these things damage the reputation of the FSF.

All this could be avoided by doing absolutely nothing. He resigned, after all.
In theory you should deeply know how the frameworks that qualify for your project. You need to know it to make a good decision wether to take it or not.

You need to know it deeply if you use it, because frameworks usually offer relatively leaky abstractions where you need to know implementation details for the best results.

You need to know i if you roll your own code, so you understand which parts you can leave off and how to do the parts that you also need (if you cannot reuse code you should always try to copy the idea of existing code and adapt it to your problem first).

In my opinion using a framework or not should always be an informed decision.
Tales of TDD – The Case of Overused Test Doubles
Curious timing for libreboot/Leah.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26638037
Yeah, but the Linux Foundation is, well, about Linux, which is GNU GPL licensed I think...
I seems to me the friendliest "enemy" on this list.
They plainly state their irrational opinion that the resignation was the result of a smear campaign by anti-open-source entities and even list them.

That's just hysterical garbage. RMS did this to himself by being an abrasive asshole and failing to curb his autistic tendencies. As a major thought leader, he ought to know better.
That's wrong. It's only if you distribute the software you modified that you need to share those modifications. If you dont distribute it, you can use it without any restriction at all.
If you think Stallman stands for open source you don't understand free software, open source, nor Stallman.
Show HN: A lovechild of Spotify and Reddit to share your favourite song snippets
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtXAxk9nDcQ
Right, and beyond the value proposition of the email service, you are also serving your customers _by_ being profitable. Because this suggests that your service will be around in many years and hopefully won’t change in ways that users won’t appreciate (which is common with funded companies these days).
> I can understand in the abstract that of course you could rap in German, but it's quite another to encounter evidence of this in the wild so to speak.

Depending on what you consider "in the wild" but German rap is very popular in Germany and other German-speaking countries. People from Germany usually don't rap in English or French. Smudo is an old school, but are quite a bit of rapper that are popular right now, like Capital Bra, Apache 207, Samra, Lea, Mero, Loredana, Bushido, Sido, Olexesh, Kollegah, Farid Bang, RAF Camora, ... just on top of my head.
Well it isn't like dentists in the US are real doctors like in other countries
I mean, the OSI is filled with people who work for proprietary companies, and open source was made to make free software enterprise.

And the Linux Foundation has a bunch of people from companies that also promote largely proprietary technologies...

So...yeah. The FSF is the last beacon of morality here, in its own strange, beady-eyed way.

I'm not a huge fan of Stallman, myself (I have had many arguments with him), but the people opposing him are pretty awful people largely pushing proprietary software, actually.
That marks attempt #3 here at begging the question.