GNU does not own a monopoly on the definition of free software.

Terming it as a ‘monopoly’ doesn’t invalidate what it is. FSF’s definition of Free software is what’s accepted as canonical definition of free software - just as OSI’s definition is accepted as the definition of open source. The entire analysis of FOSS ecosystem is based on these definitions. It’s not open to interpretation. You can’t claim victory by insisting on accepting a falsehood as the truth.

It wouldn’t be hard to argue that capitalist exploitation of the commons ruins the freedoms many would like to see.

That’s not an excuse for misrepresenting the motives of a project. If you don’t want capitalists not using your work, you’re free to restrict that. What you are not free to do is to claim it as free software. You can’t have it both ways.

NC is not free software by any definition. Here’s the reference: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#CC-BY-NC

Many licenses like GPL need copyright to be specified. Regardless, copyright statement won’t affect how you license the content.

Just a note - NC (noncommercial) and ND (non-derivative) would make it non-FOSS. CC BY-SA (share alike) is FOSS compatible.

Why would any other company complain?

Forget making it open source. There’s no other app or platform with so many dark patterns. Their web app is utter crap on mobile in an attempt to push users to the mobile app. The last thing we need is another social media company twisting the hands of its users. People should simply abandon that crapware.

He might be the very reason that phrase was invented, considering how many innocent young lives he took.

I think Henry Kissinger is one of those unifying things. It’s amazing, black or white, communist or capitalist, east or west…

Oh! Is that why they gave him the Nobel piss prize?

There’s a mythical story (Greek or Roman) where a goddess managed to get her human lover an eternal life, but forgot to ask for eternal youth. This oversight led to the horror where he watched his beautiful young lover from afar while he lost all grace, prominence and influence while withering away into an eternal life of suffering.

Honestly, that is what this old goat deserved. Not the peaceful death that he got.

I don’t think you understand the psychology of sociopaths like him. They care neither for anyone’s suffering nor for anyone’s opinion about them. They care only for the pleasure they derive from the pain they inflict. He probably spent his last waking hours reminiscing over the glory days of the massacres he started.

The world would have been a better place if somebody had made a better decision 101 years ago.

And the cherry on top is the Nobel ‘peace’ prize.

Freeze peach absolutist, ya all!

I’m aware of FTP. It’s still around in certain circles. But for a moment I thought that there was some sort of integration between ftp and git. I guess not.

No. I mean gitdirectory over FTP.

You won’t be able to contribute to a project on any of those instances, unless you register on it. So if you are a prolific contributor, you might end up signing up on dozens of those instances.

Forgefed is a federation protocol for such instances. It’s based on ActivityPub - the same that powers Lemmy and Mastodon. You can have just one account on a single instance and still be able to contribute to projects on multiple others. It’s still in the works though. It’s expected that at least gitlab, gitea and forgejo will support it.

Why exactly do normal people with small defaults have ‘collection agents’ sent after them, while billion dollar defaults are written off? Isn’t that supposed to be the other way around?

Get one of those cheap thin-client or micro-ATK type desktop, install as a server and move your online services there. Too bad this isn’t that popular yet.

The forgefed spec itself is a work-in-progress. Not yet ready for a proper implementation.

Is there any reference for this? I can’t find anything relevant. Just curious.