I would rather own my files on my phone like it's the year 2000 than my devices becoming useless whenever $streaming_service shuts down or changes policy like it's the year 1984...

OK I had the same problem as you and found the solution in dvdbackup + mkvtoolnix + some scripting glue + [optional step: ffmpeg/handbrake for transcoding]. My solution works but is not optimal but it works using only libre software. I'm writing a page on my website to document this libre dvd ripping setup, it is very much in progress but I will be improving it as I go, hence I prefer to point you to the page.

I had to dig around on the makemkv forum to find the source code: https://forum.makemkv.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=224 but I have no idea how recent that is and the developpers are only giving the minimum source out of obligation from the GPL. They litteraly wrote "GPL is cancer" in their source code. This, plus the fact that there was no clear link to the source code and that it's distributed as a tar (couldn't find a git repo) really stinks.

I don't know, nothing struck me as new, the only difference is the presentation and the mouse (but I prefer keyboard). the example given for animated indicators already exists using ASCII escape codes. my zsh already has syntax highlighting on the prompt indicating mistyped commands, and suggest possible completions with a tui (with vim bindings). I could go on but anyway my point is everything they show is already possible with a tui, the only reason a clicky clicky solution doesn't exist is because keyboard are freakin better and faster. They are right that we need a terminal evolution/revolution, but it's not the mouse.

Honestly I'm disappointed. The reasons exposed here are much too weak.

I don't see how using a proprietary license will help your dilema. If I install proprietary software in my car, I have 0 idea what it is doing, I can have no assurance that it is not doing telemetry and sending all the collected license plates to a centralized system. You want a way for users to control their own copy of the software whilst you retain the ability to control other's copies of the software. That's impossible. Either the users control the software or the software controls the users, there's no other way.

You are afraid that if you license your software under a libre license, a government will fork the project and add centralized telemetry which to their version which they will install on their own fleet of vehicles. As you said, "The argument generally goes that people should be willing to give up some privacy if it means helping police identify stolen vehicles, AMBER alerts". The fact is, ALPR monitoring systems are already existent and in use, so people have decided to trade some of their privacy for security, trusting that their government will stick to a balance of privacy/security that is worth the trade.

THE ROOT ISSUE is that, since the software is absolutely proprietary, people have no idea which amount of their privacy is being traded for security so they have no way of holding their governments accountable, they cannot revolt if their governments overstep boundaries because they cannot know/prove if the government did step over the boundaries.

Because the system is a black box, the government can lie and say "we need this and that authorization, we need to use this dangerous tool, we need backdoors, we need to break encryption ect... to guarantee your security". Once people have been coerced into giving up their power, the government uses that power however it wants because the system is secret.

If you license your project under the AGPL, the code is required to be available so people can ensure that their government is not abusing the power they have lent, and that the balance struck between privacy/security is worth it.

Maybe the author has a specific use case, but this seems completely silly. If you want to choose which OS to boot remotely, why not ssh in the machine and change Grub's boot order for next boot with grub-reboot? Make the default boot be a minimal OS exposing ssh. You could even have the ssh server in initramfs with dropbeard / tinyssh, no need to fully boot an OS.

Tip: if you are going to store data on "the cloud" aka someone else's computer, encrypt it locally before sending the data! There are existing solutions to do this in a cloud-optimized way (that is, not sending in an archive which has to be fully reuploaded for any tiny change) such as cryptomator. I think rclone also has an encryption feature but haven't checked.

Goes to show how much of a joke copyright is. These laws are bought by and made to protect the interests of corporations. disgusting. rip aaron schwarz, your ideas live on.

ahahahhhAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARG

Yet another python packager............... insane that such a popular language still doesn't have this basic problem solved.

I don't. No. This isn't real. He's lying, surely he's lying. It's just a person on the internet making a joke right?

“Open Source has completely failed to serve the common person. For the most part, if they use us at all they do so through a proprietary software company’s systems, like Apple iOS or Google Android, both of which use Open Source for infrastructure but the apps are mostly proprietary. The common person doesn’t know about Open Source, they don’t know about the freedoms we promote which are increasingly in their interest. Indeed, Open Source is used today to surveil and even oppress them.”
- Open source leader gets redpilled on permissive licenses.

> publishes work under a permissive license which explicitly allows converting it into proprietary software without giving any work back to the original developer.
> Big corporation does just that
> open source guy complains about big corporation and says "FOSS licenses have outlived their purpose"

Duh! That's why Richard Stallman created the GPL from the start and advocates anyone who wants to further the goal of freedom to use copyleft!

Had everyone used strong copyleft like AGPL or GPLv3+ instead of cuck licenses and the game would be MUCH different with corporations grabing work gratis from open source devs.

This is not an issue with free (as in freedom) software licenses, it is the issue of open source. Open source tries to give freedom to users without ever speaking about freedom, instead marketing the move to open source as a technical advantage. This, as Perens says in the above quote, has not resulted in more freedom for the user. Richard Stallman has been saying for many years that this approach will not work - see the essay “Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software” (can be found in Free Software, Free Society, Selected Essays of Richard M.Stallman and probably on gnu.org).