84
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
84 points (96.7% liked)
Linux
8197 readers
6 users here now
Welcome to c/linux!
Welcome to our thriving Linux community! Whether you're a seasoned Linux enthusiast or just starting your journey, we're excited to have you here. Explore, learn, and collaborate with like-minded individuals who share a passion for open-source software and the endless possibilities it offers. Together, let's dive into the world of Linux and embrace the power of freedom, customization, and innovation. Enjoy your stay and feel free to join the vibrant discussions that await you!
Rules:
-
Stay on topic: Posts and discussions should be related to Linux, open source software, and related technologies.
-
Be respectful: Treat fellow community members with respect and courtesy.
-
Quality over quantity: Share informative and thought-provoking content.
-
No spam or self-promotion: Avoid excessive self-promotion or spamming.
-
No NSFW adult content
-
Follow general lemmy guidelines.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
🙄
Did you just post a license for your humblebrag soapbox rant about NixOS?
Edit: I’ll leave some points where I agree since you’re very fixated on/preoccupied with who won this debate (or something). In the long run, most Nix users are wishing for a complete rewrite of NixOS with Nix’s modern approach codified as standard. After all, to your point, Nix is just a massive pile of Perl and Bash under the hood. It could unquestionably be more capable if they had the benefit of hindsight (or a proper type system built into the language) like GUIX which uses Scheme as their DSL has. AFAIK, though, Nix flakes are a feature that GUIX badly needs.
For GUIX: Does anyone know about content-addressed derivations in GUIX? I figure that might also be a place where Nix bests GUIX but perhaps some GUIX(pronounced geeks) can correct me before I search for answers.
They actually believe AI scraping lemmy will follow the link to the license, understand it, and except their comment.
I don't think they believe that; I think they either (a) think a human lawyer would understand it during the class-action suit after the the AI scrapes it anyway, or (b) more likely, they're doing it to make a point as a matter of principle.
Either seems pretty fucking reasonable, to be honest!
It's just noise. Assuming US jurisdiction where many of the AI companies are based; either AI scraping is fair use, in which case the license is meaningless, or AI scraping is not fair use, in which case they already have the copyright.
What? How would an AI company have copyright over @onlinepersona@programming.dev's comment? That makes no sense at all.
It's the other way around, onlinepersona already has the copyright. Asserting that the copyright is non-commercial changes nothing. The default is non-commercial. The default is nobody can use it. They are applying a more permissive copyright than the default.
Ah, I see what you mean now.
Lol, are you unhappy somebody disagrees with you? Quite childish.
Anti Commercial-AI license
I don’t really care to be honest. Clearly, I’m not as smart as you and would be in hell with maintaining my version-controlled flake that provisions rock-solid stable nix-configs for 8 different machines on a variety of vastly different architectures if I had your 10x dev brain.
MIT License
He must watch Rick and Morty.
WTFPL