Programmer, Gamer

  • 0 Posts
  • 6 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: August 11th, 2023
  • EzTerry@lemmy.ziptoWorld News@lemmy.world•Trump cancels sanctions on Israeli settlers in West BankEnglish
    174·
    3 months ago

    I know it’s an unpopular opinion, but I hate the term “Genocide Joe”:

    • it doesn’t put enough fault on Netanyahu
    • its an in group term, if you are in the group you know what it means, if not its either has no meaning, or is taken too literally/incorrectly.
    • The middle east is a mess, we make it worse in every attempt to improve it, but some of those religiously using this phrase I don’t think want peace, just wish a different group was winning. This is a small subset of those using the phrase, but seem to be driving the political outcome by an oversized amount.

    See the expression should be Netanyahu is treating the Palestinians like Hitler did the Jews. So why are we [Joe/Harris] so blindly following this.

    And I know the political answer to this is Joe/Harris were trying to use there position for political pressure… I’d say it failed but they did get a last min ceasefire, so history may prove otherwise.

  • EzTerry@lemmy.ziptoAsklemmy@lemmy.ml•Which keyboard app do you use on your phones? Do you enable clipboard history in it?English
    0·
    5 months ago

    First realize what is being talked about is the generally agreed upon open source definition https://opensource.org/osd

    While it seems they have simplified the license removing some reasons it’s not to be considered open source, it’s still restricting commercial uses in the following two restrictions:

    "You may distribute the software or provide it to others only if you do so free of charge for non-commercial purposes.

    Notwithstanding the above, you may not remove or obscure any functionality in the software related to payment to the Licensor in any copy you distribute to others."

    In short open source would only require the software be distributed with source under the same licensed as recieved, thus can’t restrict it to non-commercial, nor prevent the changing of payment details.

    Obviously it’s a reasonably permissive license, and possibly won’t impact you from using it as an end user. It’s just has some restrictions for the creators to request payment, and to prevent third parties profiting off the product. Think Creative Commons, share alike, non-commercial for software. (While most will consider this fair its not quite fully open)

    One reason they went this route was to prevent third parties form distributing their software with ads and using it in systems they are actively attempting to provide alternatives for (ie software that may spy on your system useage/and call home) the non-commercial clause has more teeth than say MIT where it would be relicensed, or GPL that while the software source would need to be provided might still be embedded in a ecosystem.

  • EzTerry@lemmy.ziptoNews@lemmy.world•Teen pizza delivery driver shot at multiple times after parking in the wrong drivewayEnglish
    2·
    1 year ago

    Many EU countries have freedom to roam laws to allow access accross undeveloped private property, this includes as you said camping as long as you leave the land as found.

    In the US i know of no state allowing such, and the ability of the person traversing the land to sue the owner means the default is no treasspassing signs everywhere. this isnt to say if you were unsure if the land was private and there is no sign/indicator of tresspassing you coulding walk through but that isnt strictly giving you the right to access the land

    in western States quite a bit of land is federally owned and behaves more like right to roam, this has made odd cases there is a cheker board patern between two federal land areas and private property and what to do when a hunter says steps over the corner of the private properties between the two public access areas.