Yeah, trusting someone to make right decisions is hard because this trust usually ends up being betrayed sooner or later.

Regarding the first part, I meant that we as a community can’t put enough pressure on a bully to make em leave, if that bully is part of the community that supports em.

It says ‘as a large language model’ in the beginning, and ‘sincerely’ in the end

And what would happen when the community itself is built on hatred and welcomes hate wholeheartedly?

Connection to the state sounds like a much better reason than ‘being Russian or using Russian email address’. I understand why the internet ‘discussion’ mostly fails to notice this difference

As far as I understand, they don’t want to publish new releases there because there’s nothing new to release, and they don’t have resources to maintain it

It’s not a cell phone, y’all.

That also doesn’t really need annual updates. I’m guessing the only reason phone manufacturers do that is out of fear that otherwise users will go and buy something else from those who do annual updates.

Except for the countries that have anti-hate laws that are deliberately vague and specifically used to jail anyone who is disliked by the government. China and Russia come to mind as examples, but I’m sure they aren’t the only ones.

Besides hate-speech, I’m not sure how much should be censored really. China does a lot of censoring to ‘protect’ their citizens from everything, I’m not sure this would be a good thing even if that really was a goal.

And protecting children from traumatising content looks like another good thing to do, but under that banner I usually see governments doing whatever they want without caring about children past using their image.

With that I agree

What’s the joke about? Does Ireland block everything that comes from the Netherlands?

A lot of computational heavy tasks for science were done in Fortran at least ten years ago (and I think still are). I was told that’s mainly because Fortran has a good deal of libraries for just that, and it was widely taught in academia so this is a common ground between the older and newer generations.

I think it may be gradually superseded by Python, but I don’t know if it is

I’m unfamiliar with bitwarden’s licence and skimmed through the issue and my understanding is:

1. To use bitwarden API you must use SDK
2. To use SDK you are obligated to be the official application, otherwise you violate the licence
3. The official application is GPL but since SDK is somehow ‘separate program’ it is considered OK to couple with a more restrictive license

However, our goal is to make sure that the SDK is used in a way that maintains GPL compatibility.

This is something I completely fail to understand other that mental gymnastics to bend the truth enough to not look like they are not quite right

Edit: is my understanding correct? It looks like this is not the first project that becomes ‘source available’ after being FOSS in the past, as of lately

However you define it, a central nervous system or other type of similar central unit would have to be a requirement, because that is what would actually be sentient

Without CNS there would be something else sophisticated enough to show sentience that would have been sentient. So to me it looks like this is not really a requirement, albeit it’s simpler to say that it is.

As a side note, I think that given how human-centric humans are (which is to be expected, really) even if we were living with another sentient species on the same planet we would argue they are not sentient for whatever reason we could come up with, and change sentience definition accordingly

lectured on semantics rather than responding to the meaning

this is ironic

not even all vegans who don’t use honey agree on whether or not a vegan can use honey

Exactly this, veganism is ethical choice, and ethics is not science. You can’t ‘prove’ that something is acceptable, nor vice versa. There are guidelines and discussions but that’s pretty much it.

So this is really not about whether bees are animals or not.

But you can ignore the response if you decide to not deal with it

How do you make sure you understood the idea if the word choice is incorrect? You may assume from context what the idea was, but you may as well assume wrong. And the more such assumptions exist in one dialogue, the further it is from information exchange, and the closer it is to not listening at all because you already knew the context before the dialogue

Perhaps some forks still exist…

No, that’s impossible, because they didn’t allow it 😭

Regarding the proprietary assets, I used to give it some thought, and came to a conclusion that other than selling consultance services, selling assets is the only way to make money while creating something open source. That’s why now I don’t find proprietary assets to be something bad.

if it’s not distributable without condition, it’s not open source

MIT and GPL are not open source then, since they impose conditions. Open source by your definition would be some like WTFPL or Unlicense

No, I don’t, does that also prove your point?