That’s strange. Please let me know what you find out.

This is a great idea, thank you!

And the GPL is okay with that? Can every repo under GPL put up a paywall?

Google: “The GNU General Public License (GNU, GPL, or GPL) is a free software license originally written by Richard Stallman of the Free Software Foundation, which guarantees that users are free to use, share, and modify the software without paying anyone for it.”

Within the analogy (as it compares to Redhat and the Rebuilders), how is Foo helping Bar? Isn’t Foo simply leaving the TVs outside the factory for people to come and pickup? A bunch of trucks branded “Bar” come by, pick some of them up, rebrand them, and take jobs to install them, jobs that Foo thought they were going to get? Isn’t Foo now requiring individual people to walk through a lockable door, sign their name, verify that they don’t work for Bar, and grab a TV instead of just leaving them outside in a pile?

I don’t see how Company Foo can dictate that all other entities (customers, for example) can receive a free TV on their doorstep (since the code is open source) except for Company Bar. To make it map better to the situation, Company Bar would receive a shipment of free TVs, rebrand them, ship them out to customers, and install them.

“They don’t have to give Company Bar TVs to install.” So the GPL doesn’t require that Company Foo permit free access to the TVs? They could decide to not give out their TVs to anyone?

Also, what if I wanted to get my cousin a free TV but charge him a few bucks to install it? Is this only a problem at scale?

Oh, I see. But what do you think of this translation:

“Company Foo makes TVs and is always working to make them better. They give them out for free with the hopes of making money installing them and providing guidance on how to use them, but someone starts Company Bar and installs them for cheaper and starts taking on installation jobs.”

Is this wrong? Isn’t this just the definition of an open market? Please let me know if I’m missing some kind of context. I hope that we can continue to discuss this respectfully.

I should say that I want any open source project with the motivation to write good software to have all of the funding they need to make that happen. I just don’t see how it can be justified in this instance when compared to any other market.

What’s the harm in doing a rebuild? Serious question. I simply don’t understand where the harm comes from. I would appreciate any insight. Thanks.

It’s interesting that the bulk of the article is suggesting that this is a bit overblown.

Quote: "The International Council of Beverages Associations’ executive director Kate Loatman said public health authorities should be “deeply concerned” by the “leaked opinion”, and also warned it “could needlessly mislead consumers into consuming more sugar rather than choosing safe no-and low-sugar options.”

Yeah, looking at these notes, they don’t appear particularly useful for my purposes either. It’s a challenge to find good, ready-to-use material. Thanks for sharing them, though.

If I wanted to use these notes as direct source material for an open source quiz project, would that be okay? I’ve been looking for good, free, open source notes, Q&As, and diagrams but it’s not easy.

I had issues searching for Lemmy communities until I updated my docker-compose to give the “lemmy” container it’s own network.

https://lemmy.austinwadeheller.com/comment/14247

I was surprised at how useful my Chromebook was for software development, but lacking dedicated Delete, Home, and End keys pushed me to start using Vim bindings… which I now love and will use for the rest of my life. They are so useful. Now I just wish I had a more powerful Chromebook. I have the cheapest possible one and it’s a little slow sometimes. I prefer as light of a laptop as possible.

I don’t know… if joins are so good, why did it take so long for them to show up via SQL? /s

Here’s a post on Mastodon that links to their blog where they describe different clients.

https://writing.exchange/@erlend/110616473377954593

It looks like Pinetime lets you customize the watch face with Rust, but is it touchscreen? Am I right in seeing that it only runs the update logic once every minute?

How does this work with the code license? If this is all fine, doesn’t this mean that we should be avoiding the kind of license they’re using in the future?

I generally avoid this situation. At best I’ll create an Rc<HashMap<T, U>> to pass around. I find that having a need for a static variable can be an indication of bad design. It often makes the code that depends on it untestable.

You may be able to use something like lazy_static.

https://docs.rs/lazy_static/latest/lazy_static/

This is very interesting. Why is there a region highlighted (like a large circular paint brush) before the point manipulation occurs? It doesn’t seem to restrict the changes in the image to only that region (ex: the dog ears change outside the region).

Thanks!