yarr

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] yarr@feddit.nl 42 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Except that current pope has been working with that org for a number of years and is a known quantity vs. some outside guy you're bringing in from the cold. A nice try at an analogy, but it doesn't quite stack up.

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I wouldn’t trust that company to be their customer if I knew they operate like that

Hahaha, I suggest you never look behind the scenes at an F500 then. This would be one of the more sane things to happen in that environment.

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 2 points 2 days ago

They have always been open and clear about letting you build it and use it however you like.

I don't disagree with the want to license software like this. The downside then is a subset of "letting you build and use it any way you like" includes registering N trial accounts every 30 days. If this isn't actually spelled out as illegal under the license, some jerkbag will do it. I wish we didn't live in this world, but we do.

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 1 points 2 days ago

Company sizes must be limited by law. No person shall own more than one company, no company shall employ more than 1000 people, any company with a net worth over 50 million has taxes go to 100% for any of the worth after those 50m.

Good luck with that one. Try to convince congress critters about this point of view while they take a second or two to look up from the pork barrel. I 100% agree this would be great, I just fail to see any possible way to get there.

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 6 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Easy, just have two of your staff do alternate 24/7 shifts, renewing just in time. As long as this costs less than the price of licencing the proper way, still a "win".

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 9 points 2 days ago (7 children)

As a small aside "Open Source Free Trials?" If it's open source, can't they just disable the trial part? I think (as usual) some essential nuance got destroyed converting this article to a ~~clickbait~~ ~~engaging~~ exciting headline.

To anyone that isn't aware of this: big companies don't give a fuck about anything except stock price going up. They will crush dreams every quarter to do this. They don't care.

If you don't like how a company is using your software and you're hoping they will have a conscience/heart... don't! Fix your license to make this use case illegal/impossible if it really matters to you.

Or, consider if Open Source is even the right license here (although I think the headline is a bit confused here)...

If you want this "fixed", tweak your license and/or send a cease and desist to that company and/or seek damages. Changing nothing and waiting for them to do the right thing, you're going to be waiting infinitely, because they will never do the right thing. They will do the thing that gets them the most revenue with the least spending. That's all you can count on.

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 16 points 2 days ago (6 children)

Explain how to mesh that with "the stock price must go up each quarter, no matter what"

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

My favorite one that I've heard is: "ban it". This has a lot of problems... let's say despite the billions of dollars of lobbyists already telling Congress what a great thing AI is every day, that you manage to make AI, or however you define the latest scary tech, punishable by death in the USA.

Then what happens? There are already AI companies in other countries busily working away. Even the folks that are very against AI would at least recognize some limited use cases. Over time the USA gets left behind in whatever the end results of the appearance of AI on the economy.

If you want to see a parallel to this, check out Japan's reaction when the rest of the world came knocking on their doorstep in the 1600s. All that scary technology, banned. What did it get them? Stalled out development for quite a while, and the rest of the world didn't sit still either. A temporary reprieve.

The more aggressive of you will say, this is no problem, let's push for a worldwide ban. Good luck with that. For almost any issue on Earth, I'm not sure we have total alignment. The companies displaced from the USA would end up in some other country and be even more determined not to get shut down.

AI is here. It's like electricity. You can not wire your house but that just leads to you living in a cabin in the woods while your neighbors have running water, heat, air conditioning and so on.

The question shouldn't be, how do we get rid of it? How do we live without it? It should be, how can we co-exist with it? What's the right balance? The genie isn't going back in the bottle, no matter how hard you wish.

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 28 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Great! With this source code out, I can finally complete the port to Linux. I call it WSL24L, aka "Windows Subsystem For Linux 2, For Linux"

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 3 points 3 days ago

No, that one was actually pretty spot on. My uncle works at Nintendo and he told me it's pretty similar there.

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 5 points 3 days ago

I've never had vaseline on a windshield on a foggy day, just on an overcast one. You'd have to try it yourself.

 

Another "win" for the tariffs... Good luck blaming this one on Biden!

https://www.wtrf.com/news/devastating-blow-ohio-company-will-no-longer-develop-transformer-production-plant-in-the-ohio-valley-that-was-bringing-in-over-600-jobs/


WEIRTON, W.Va. (WTRF) — The future of the proposed transformer manufacturing facility in Weirton is facing uncertainty after union leaders learned that the project is facing major challenges.

Earlier this week, union leaders with the United Steelworkers say they met with company officials with Cleveland-Cliffs to talk about plans for the transformer facility in Weirton.

What they thought was going to be a meeting to discuss bringing back workers to the idle mill turned into unexpected news of an indefinite delay for the project.

United Steelworkers staff representative John Saunders says the reason for the pause in plans is because of financial issues and the uncertainty surrounding tariffs.

He says the change in plans leaves a lot of questions about what’s next.

It was unexpected and devastating; we thought we had the potential to bring back 600 people at Weirton over a period of time, and then we find out it’s indefinitely delayed, so that’s a really tough setback.”

John Saunders – District 1, Staff Representative for United Steelworkers The decision coincided with Cleveland-Cliffs’ release of its first-quarter 2025 results, in which the company announced it would no longer deploy capital toward the Weirton transformer plant.

 

The phenomenon of sovereign citizens persistently trying to win court cases with their principles, despite a lack of success, is indeed puzzling. On YouTube alone, there are around 5,000 videos showing sovereign citizens facing defeat in the courtroom. These individuals often make claims that have yet to prove successful and frequently end up incarcerated.

Why do people continue to adopt this seemingly futile approach? It's akin to watching 5,000 parachutists attempt a failed jump from the Eiffel Tower, only for newcomers to keep trying despite knowing, or perhaps ignoring, the inevitable outcome. Despite the growing pile of mangled bodies at the base of the tower, every day people decide to climb up and try for themselves.

The dedication of these individuals is noteworthy; they invest a great deal of time mastering the intricacies of their "sovereign" defense. Yet, it seems that they dedicate little time to researching previous legal outcomes or understanding why their arguments haven't held up in court historically.

What drives this persistence? Is it a deep-seated belief system that overrides rational analysis, or is there another factor at play that encourages them to keep going despite overwhelming evidence of failure?

 

I’ve been reading up on the tariffs that were imposed during the Trump administration and I keep seeing mixed reviews about their effectiveness. On one hand, they seemed to protect certain domestic industries by making imported goods more expensive; on the other hand, there’s a lot of talk about higher prices for consumers and retaliatory measures from trading partners.

The thing is, these tariffs aren’t exactly popular among everyone. If we were to look back 1 year out, 2 years out, and even a few more years down the line, how will we actually know if this was a good move?

Surely there are some metrics or outcomes that can help us evaluate their success or failure. I guess it's not as simple as checking stock market performance alone, although that’s probably part of it, right?

Is it primarily about looking at changes in trade balances with countries like China, or do we need to consider the broader economic impacts, such as job growth within certain industries? And how much weight should be given to the political ramifications, like strengthened relationships (or tensions) with trading partners?

I’d love to hear your thoughts on what metrics or indicators would help determine whether these tariffs were indeed a beneficial strategy. Thanks in advance for any insights!

 

Back in 1970, Alvin Toffler wrote Future Shock, where he introduced the idea that too much rapid change could leave people feeling overwhelmed, stressed, and disconnected. He called it "future shock" — and honestly, reading it today feels almost eerie with how accurate he was.

Toffler believed we were moving from an industrial society to a "super-industrial" one, where everything would change faster than people could handle. The book was a huge hit at the time, selling over six million copies, but what's crazy is how much of what he talked about feels even more true in 2025. Some examples:

  • Disposable culture: He predicted throwaway products, and now we have single-use plastics, fast fashion, and gadgets that feel obsolete within a year.

  • Tech burnout: Toffler said technology would become outdated faster and faster. Today, if you don’t upgrade your phone or update your software, you feel left behind.

  • Rent instead of own: Services like Airbnb and Uber fit his prediction that we’d move away from owning things and toward renting everything.

  • Job instability: He nailed the rise of the gig economy, freelancing, and how fast-changing industries make it hard to stay trained up and secure.

  • Transient relationships: He warned about shallow, fleeting social connections — something social media, dating apps, and global mobility have absolutely amplified.

  • Information overload: This term literally came from Future Shock, and if you've ever felt exhausted just from scrolling through your feeds or reading the news, you know exactly what he meant.

Toffler also talked about the "death of permanence" — not just products, but relationships, jobs, even identities becoming temporary and interchangeable. He warned it would cause "shattering stress and disorientation." Looking around at the rising rates of anxiety, depression, and burnout today, it’s hard not to see what he meant.

I think about this book a lot when I read about some of the sick things happening today. Is this a warped perspective?

 

For those of you that haven't seen, 4chan was hacked:

https://boingboing.net/2025/04/17/4chan-hacked-obliterated-and-unlikely-to-be-back-soon.html

A deadly blow? Will a copycat spring up? Where are the users going in the meantime? Does any of this really matter?

 

I was watching some YouTube, trying to find some forgotten gems from retro systems. I ran into one about the Jaguar and decided to watch it.

Well, the fellow said a lot of the games were great, and I was kind of curious about that because I don't think it's controversial to say there's only a handful of decent games on the Jag, but this fellow was rating everything highly.

Later on I sat down to think about it and I realized something... after every game the fellow would say "Oh, and you can get it for about $XX.XX."

At that point the light-bulb went off and I realized this fellow is probably deriving enjoyment from collecting the Jaguar games, not playing them. To him, if he buys a game, plays it for a few minutes to make sure it works, it's probably a winner for him.

For me, who is getting Jaguar games from uhhhh a friend, I don't care about collecting them, I just want some fun stuff to play.

Anyway, I learned my lesson: I'll believe non-collectors' opinions more than collectors because they are mostly concerned with gameplay instead of how it looks on the shelf, or how rare and difficult it was to acquire.

P.S. I don't know how "hot" of a take this is, but I figure it'll probably hurt the feelings of collectors, so that's why I prefixed it.

 

YOU CAN PROVE TO YOURSELF ITS NOT A GLOBE

view more: next ›