TootSweet
@TootSweet@lemmy.world
- Comment on Become unrecognizable 7 hours ago:
- ✅
- ✅
- ❌
- ✅
- ✅/❌
- ❌
-
- ❌
- Comment on How does one learn or start to manage thair life better? 6 days ago:
That sounds like exactly the sort of thing therapy is for. I’m no kind of expert, but it’s very likely there’s a lot of deeper things keeping you from developing achieving the kind of skills you’re wanting. And it sounds very much like it’s a problem in your life that’s causing you a lot of anxiety and pain. I think if there’s any way you can do talk therapy, that’s the place to start.
- Comment on How does one learn or start to manage thair life better? 6 days ago:
Wow. Huge topic. And it depends on a ton of things. And I definitely don’t feel like I’ve got it all figured out myself.
If you’re young and just for the first time having to manage your own affairs rather than depend on parents to help with that, then self-help kind of stuff might well be a fine place to start. (Just avoid Jordan Peterson.) If you’re older and feel like you’ve had the time needed to develop those skills and still don’t have them, it’s likely there’s something deeper going on that might benefit from therapy.
I personally cared for my ailing grandmother for a long time. And that shit’s hard work, and takes a lot of time. In the process, I let a lot of things go by the wayside like yardwork, home repair, and organization. Now that she has passed, I find myself with a lot of remedial work to catch up on. I feel like I’m making progress. It’s frustrating and slow, but it is progressing and that’s the important part.
- Comment on What's happened from July to September 2025 that might make people Google "Worst timeline"? 1 week ago:
Send help.
- Comment on Superman is a terrible person who wants to take away people's freedom. 1 week ago:
Every time you see a Grimreaper thread, I want you all to remember…
spoiler
You just lost the game.
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
Well, 50% is “at least 15%”.
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
- Comment on [Discussion] These 10 Anime Masterpieces Are a Rite of Passage for Every Fan 1 week ago:
I sometimes think I ought to start One Piece, but every time I think about starting, I’m reminded that:
- I’ve kindof got a completionism problem and…
- IT’S GOT LIKE 1,150 EPISODES HOLY FUCK
- Comment on Concerned about claiming warranty for homelab with Linux 1 week ago:
I can’t imagine you’re the only one in this situation. If I were in your shoes, I’d search for similar stories online and see if I could get a sense of how friendly the company is to swapping OSs. For some companies, changing the OS is a complete deal breaker. Other companies are pretty willing to assume the issue was indeed strictly hardware and had nothing to do with changing the OS, and thus will go ahead and do the repair.
If you find that company is more like the former, install Windows. If not, just start the warranty repair process.
- Comment on Is Louis Rossmann a fascist like futo? 2 weeks ago:
Depends how he responds now that that article came out, I’d say.
- Comment on Futo updates their website, removing logos, clarifying micro grants 2 weeks ago:
As others have said, you’re changing the topic talking about FUTO’s license in a response to a comment about the AGPL.
But to continue your thread:
If you ask them to articulate their concern, I haven’t heard one that isn’t on the lines of “I want to be able to use this code in my paid product”…
I specifically want anyone to be allowed to use any and all FOSS software I write (and I do write and publish some) commercially, so long as they abide by the terms of the license I choose. (Typically the AGPLv3.)
If, for instance, a mainstream commercial consumer electronics device incorporated my code into the firmware and because my code is under the AGPLv3, end users had the legal right to demand the means to modify the behavior of their devices to better suit them, I’d be thrilled.
Plus, if they’re distributing a modified version of my code, that might well include some improvements generally useful for all/most/many users of my project. And if it’s under the AGPLv3, I can demand a copy of the code and incorporate those improvements back upstream into my project so all users of my FOSS project can benefit from it.
Commercial redistribution is more of a feature than you think. I think you’re missing the point of copyleft.
- Comment on Futo updates their website, removing logos, clarifying micro grants 2 weeks ago:
Nothing about copyleft causes the “owner” to not hold the copyright on a work.
Copyright gives the holder (either the author or the party to which the copyright is assigned) a few specific (but broad) exclusive rights to the work: reproduction, preparation of derivative works, distribution, public performance (which probably doesn’t so much apply to software), and public display (also not applicable to software, so much). (And then there’s circumvention, but that’s yucky and irrelevant to this case, so we’ll ignore it.)
“Exclusive” means nobody is allowed to do any of those things except the copyright holder (unless the copyright holder licenses those rights to others, but we’ll get to that.)
The copyright holder can give/sell/transfer the copyright to someone else (in which case the previous holder is now excluded from doing with the work all the things in the first paragraph above because someone else now holds all those exclusive rights), but that’s not what the AGPL does.
The copyright holder can also license any or all of the exclusive rights in the first paragraph to some person or party (or in the case of an “open license” like the AGPL, to everyone).
The AGPL licenses rights like distribution and preparation of derivative works to others (under certain conditions like “you can only distribute copies if you do so under the same license as you got it under”).
So, if some hypothetical party named “Bob” started a project, they’d hold the copyright. If Bob put the AGPL on that project and also required any contributor to assign copyright on their specific contributions to Bob, Bob would hold the copyright on the entire project code, including all contributions. Someone else could take advantage of the terms of the AGPL allowing derivative works and redistribution to create their own fork (so long as they abided by the conditions in the AGPL), and if they did so, they could omit on their fork any copyright assignment requirement, in which case the fork could end up owned by a mishmash of different copyright holders (making it hard to impossible for the administrator of the fork to do anything tricky like changing what license future versions were under.)
However, on Bob’s original (non-fork) version, if Bob, as the copyright holder, changes the license file to something proprietary, Bob has (arguably?) created a new work that is not the same work as the previous version, and Bob can license that new version under a different license. (I suppose one might be able to argue that changing just the license file isn’t legally enough to make a new version, but the very next time a nontrivial change was made to the codebase, that would qualify as a new version, so it kindof doesn’t matter.) Bob has already licensed previous versions of his non-fork under the AGPL, so Bob can’t really rescind that license already granted on older versions. But new versions could indeed be put under a different license. (Mind you, there are licenses that have specific terms that make them rescindable on old versions. Take for instance the Open Gaming License fiasco that WotC tried to pull not terribly long ago. But I don’t think the AGPL is a license that can be rescinded.)
Since Bob can’t rescind the license on older versions, if Bob made a future version proprietary, the community or any particular party that wanted to could take the last AGPL version of the non-fork and make a fork from there that remained under the AGPL.
The moral of the story is: if you don’t want the copylefted code project you start to be changed to a proprietary license later, don’t do any copyright assignment agreement. The codebase being owned by a diverse mishmash of different copyright holders is a feature, not a bug.
And, as mentioned elsewhere in this post, Immich is owned by a lot of different copyright holders as it has no copyright assignment requirement.
- Comment on Futo updates their website, removing logos, clarifying micro grants 2 weeks ago:
Can you name one other personality with a large following that comes even close to Louis Rossmann in bringing stuff to light and fighting back against enshittification?
Well, there’s Corey Doctorow, of course. He literally wrote the book on Enshittification.
There are definitely more “behind the scenes” folks doing a lot for that particular cause who don’t so much have the following, but nonetheless do fight enshittification in big ways. Bradley Kuhn comes to mind.
- Comment on This is called an oopsi 2 weeks ago:
Grandpa?
- Comment on Futo updates their website, removing logos, clarifying micro grants 2 weeks ago:
Huh. So anyone could maintain a fork or patchset and distribute builds that were feature-for-feature identical to Immich but with no nag screens. Just an interesting thought.
- Comment on Futo updates their website, removing logos, clarifying micro grants 2 weeks ago:
From what I’m seeing, you’re right. If there was a contributor assignment policy (some official policy associated with Immich saying that by submitting a PR, you agree to assign copyright on your code changes go the Immich project), FUTO could change the license on future versions as they wished. But it doesn’t look like there’s any contributor assignment or contributor license agreement on Immich.
To be pedantic, Immich did change from MIT to AGPLv3 a while ago. FUTO could technically scrap the current version, grab the last MIT version of the code, relicense it under their “source-first” license (or any other license they like, pretty much), and declare “this is now the official development version of Immich from which new releases will come.” That would be drastic even for FUTO, though (I don’t think that’s likely any time soon), and the community could then fork the latest AGPLv3 version with a different name and carry on with development.
- Comment on Futo updates their website, removing logos, clarifying micro grants 2 weeks ago:
That is not supporting fascist projects
Literally what I just said in the comment you responded to.
- Comment on Futo updates their website, removing logos, clarifying micro grants 2 weeks ago:
Ah. My mistake. I’ll edit my comment.
- Comment on Futo updates their website, removing logos, clarifying micro grants 2 weeks ago:
The article I linked in another comment explains more, but Eron Wolf, founder of FUTO, kindof pressured or hoodwinked Louis Rossmann into publicly interviewing Curtis Yarvin who happily refers to himself as a “reactionary fascist” and publicly states that black people are inherently suitable for enslavement.
- Comment on Futo updates their website, removing logos, clarifying micro grants 2 weeks ago:
This is all in reference to this article.
FUTO is an organization that talks a lot of rhetoric about being some bastion of consumer rights in tech, but they’re doing a lot of shitty, shady, and downright evil things. Among them, FUTO has been in the practice of making small grants to FOSS projects (like ffmpeg and musl) and then plastering the FOSS project’s name and logo all over the FUTO site in a way that makes it seem as if FUTO is endorsed by said FOSS projects when that’s not the case at all.
(All this after doing everything in their power with their rhetoric to try to discredit and degrade the entire FOSS community. They wrote an “apology”, but even in the apology, they express their “disdain for OSI approved licenses”. Mind you, none of FUTO’s projects are Open Source.)
After that article came out just a couple of days ago, apparently they redid their site, I’d have to guess in an effort to address the concern that the way FUTO presented their grant program before implied endorsement by a lot of FOSS projects that didn’t endorse them in any way. I don’t think they’ve done enough, and there are tons of other reasons to think FUTO is evil assholes using consumer rights rhetoric to manipulate people in service to its (fully for-profit) bottom line.
Other concerns in the article include FUTO’s connection to explicit/proud fascists and using their platform to (even coercing Louis Rossmann into) spread fascist propaganda.
- Comment on Microsoft's ancient icon library still lurks deep within Windows 11 2 weeks ago:
- Comment on Arby's steak bites 2 weeks ago:
Damn. In concept they sound good. Except for the whole “Arby’s” part.
- Comment on Feed a crab for a lifetime 2 weeks ago:
I was here for poop holding.
I was here for beans.
I was here for stroganoff.
And I’m here for crabs.
- Comment on Do this asap 2 weeks ago:
trying to get governments to regulate open source ai out of existence
I’m down as long as all the rest of ai goes with it.
- Comment on Metal bands 3 weeks ago:
- Comment on Would spiderman hurt a fly? 3 weeks ago:
I do that but not because of empathy or karma or anything. I just don’t want bug guts smeared across my wall.
- Comment on Would dinosaur meat taste more like frog or chicken? 3 weeks ago:
So “yes”, then.
- Comment on Have you ever been shown the "clarity"? 3 weeks ago:
There’s not all that much more to tell, really.
Normally, particularly when it’s really dark, I have a lot of little blotches of a lighter, gray shade that fade and shift constantly across my whole field of vision. Until it abated temporarily, I wouldn’t have thought it possible for it to abate. But when it did, I got to experience a more potent experience of “darkness” than I had before probably ever. But it wasn’t just darkness that was amplified. My vision definitely felt “clearer” of… the ordinary sorts of visual artifacts I see pretty much all of the time.
It was a very calming and pleasant experience for sure. Definitely the sort of thing I wish could be the case all the time.
This has only happened to me once. It came on while I was meditating (so that may not particularly qualify as “spontaneous”, but anyway) and lasted until I fell asleep maybe an hour later. By morning, my vision was “normal” again.
I’m not saying my experience was (or wasn’t) the same as the experience you’ve had. I don’t disbelieve your account, though. And it wouldn’t surprise me if the same sort of experience I had might sometimes be experienced spontaneously by some individuals.
- Comment on Have you ever been shown the "clarity"? 3 weeks ago:
I’ve had some wild experiences for sure. Total loss of visual snow. Synesthesia. Major time distortions. Stuff like that. (Meditation is a hell of a drug. For realz.) Particularly during a period of time about 9 years ago.
- Comment on FSF announces Librephone project 3 weeks ago:
Damn. They’re basing it all on LineageOS. I was hoping they’d make it a GNU/Linux phone.
