TehPers

It’s not a question of if anyone holds the copyright, but a question of whether the models themselves and their outputs are derivative works of the data the models were trained on.

If they are derivatives, it may be possible that the licenses of that training data place additional restrictions on the generated code or forbid derviative works outright.

Speaking practically, for a random “FOSS” project that isn’t very big, this is unlikely to ever come up. Courts would have to rule in favor of the training data owners, plus they would need to issue DMCA takedown requests and/or sue to have the content removed. That probably won’t happen.

However, you should probably question any project where the developers don’t understand the code well enough to write it themselves. I don’t know if that’s the case here, but that tends to be the case with vibecoded projects.

For software not exempted, the California Digital Age Assurance Act takes effect on 1 January 2027 for requiring age collection at device setup time and age-bracket signals for applications.

As a reminder, the law doesn’t require age verification, only attestation. It’s a really stupid law that accomplishes nothing for the services that now require age verification and nothing for the people opposed to it. It just makes some OSs (but apparently potentially no longer Android?) ask your age on account creation.

I still have no clue how this will work for Windows server (and the cursed Mac servers), but honestly it’s on you for using that over a Linux server.

For republishing… content that Elon doesn’t own?

I don’t see the problem.

We are somewhat similar to contractors and directly help our customers write their code. Usually this means bringing in some kind of starting template, and it’s easier to do this with a permissively licensed template than make them sign another legal agreement.

They own the code once we’re done, and they don’t need to make it open source (companies naturally don’t like to open source their products). Our templates are open source and well-documented, though.

We’ve managed to convince our workplace to allow us to use MIT on a few projects. We mainly share that code directly with customers, and it’s easier to do that with permissively licensed code, plus we can make it public for an extra win (both at work and for the community).

There are definitely good uses for permissive licenses. In the same way that you should consider not using one, you should also consider whether one meets your specific needs.

GitHub more like ShitHub

Codeberg is free. If you need uptime, self host it.

I’ve read tamer media that would still qualify as questionable. I think the real question is whether something is “NSFW” if it’s written media rather than visual since it’s unlikely a colleague is reading your book.

That being the case, F-Droid has its own definition for NSFW, and no reasonable definition of NSFW that doesn’t specifically exclude written media or religious texts would exclude the Bible (or any Abrahamic religious text, really). It’s more that those books get a pass for historical reasons than anything else.

I’m definitely not the target audience for this, but I know a lot of people who would love something like this. Please continue to post updates now and then!

Long term, it’d be cool to see iOS support as well, though that’s not easy to do. Since it’s still in early development, I’m curious if that’s on your radar. If not, makes sense of course. Just throwing that out there since you’re asking for feedback.

If you have an integrated GPU in your processor (I’m assuming you do unless you have no graphical output at all), you can also try to run one of their really small models on it. Otherwise, their smaller models are also faster, so I’d recommend trying those on your CPU to start with.

The README lists the VRAM requirements for their different models if you plan to run with a GPU. Without a GPU, you can translate those roughly to system RAM.

Note that ML models pretty much always runs faster on a GPU due to the kinds of operations needed to execute them. If you have the option to run on a GPU, you probably should just do that. Even their largest model only requires ~10GB VRAM based on their table, and if you only need English, you can use a smaller one specialized for English (like medium.en).

I already did.

If you have nothing of value to add, then I’m done discussing this.

If you have tunnel vision, then sure. In fact, it’s just as comparable as downloading from realappmirror.ru where you have the same number of intermediaries.

In that case, both FDroid and the browser are intermediaries and potential attack vectors. You go through the same number of middlemen. One just verifies the packages for you.

The qualities that were specified were security. Do you plan to actually explain how both FDroid and random GitHub downloads are equally insecure?

FDroid’s official repository includes fairly strict requirements for apps they allow, meaning you get a level of confidence that those apps meet those requirements. You can add custom repos in the app, but it’s not the default flow. To use a recent example, it’s like comparing the Arch official repos to AUR.

Not that there isn’t value in a tool that can download apps for you from GitHub, but it’s not really fair to compare that to F-Droid. You’re generally safer on F-Droid’s official repo than with random projects off GitHub, and potentially even safer than downloading official releases of apps on F-Droid directly from the releases page.

While not legal advice:

In general, you can copy and create your own works for personal use as long as you keep them to yourself. Copyright is usually enforced on distribution, so if you don’t distribute, nobody cares.

Free licenses (MIT, GPL variants, Apache, BSD, and so on) allow you to copy and create your own works and distribute the work freely. Free licenses allow you to distribute your work if you share the source code, and some (MIT, Apache, etc) allow you to distribute the work even without sharing your source code as long as you provide the source code for whatever was licensed (like a library you’re using that’s MIT licensed).

The licenses all have different restrictions, so it’s good to research a license before you use something licensed that way. For example, AGPL, GPL, and LGPL are all different, and some licenses may require you to rename and rebrand something if you create a fork of it.

Butterflies are free and open, with many handy features to make life and fun.

They’re designed to make remote molecules as unobtrusive and integrated as possible.

Just a few wing flaps to get you going, and from then on it’s all radiation!

Tools can be cool even if they aren’t for you. I’ll never use this, but my day isn’t ruined because it exists. OP’s day? Well, that might be ruined by your sarcasm.

Does the game even have a Matrix community? To be honest, all I know about the game is that people kept going to the language’s subreddit posting about the game and getting their posts removed. Also, something about the new player experience being abysmal at one point, though I don’t know if that has changed.

reddit Lemmy

?

Moderators have to ban them, but the bans are per server.

If you want to avoid children in the server for whatever reason, mark the channel as NSFW (though this might trigger the age verification BS for some people). Even without that, Discord generally has a minimum age requirement, so if someone admits to being below that age, you can report their account (and server owners might need to if they want to avoid issues).

There are many benefits to switching to something forum-based like Lemmy though. Aside from freeing yourself from Discord’s chokehold, you also get better archival of discussions for free, better discoverability through internet/post searches, better control over who can comment, a potential community of moderators, possibly better accessibility for visually-impaired people (even if only because images can have alt text), and so on.

Alternatives to Lemmy could be as simple as issues or discussions on the project, a community-maintained wiki, and so on.

The “F” stands for “free”. Free software is defined as having four essential freedoms:

• The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).
• The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
• The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others (freedom 2).
• The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

Notably, this definition places no restrictions on ethics. In fact, it explicitly states the opposite:

The freedom to run the program means the freedom for any kind of person or organization to use it on any kind of computer system, for any kind of overall job and purpose, without being required to communicate about it with the developer or any other specific entity. In this freedom, it is the user’s purpose that matters, not the developer’s purpose; you as a user are free to run the program for your purposes, and if you distribute it to other people, they are then free to run it for their purposes, but you are not entitled to impose your purposes on them.

What you are looking for is a different term, for example, “accessibility”. Accessibility of information is very important, but source availability and limited restrictions are what make something FOSS.