Mano, não sei se foi intencional ou não, mas aqui é uma instância internacional, meio que não vão interagir por não ser em inglês. Tem o !tecnologia@lemmy.eco.br que é de uma instância 100% BR.

Yeah, but there’s also the term “freeware”, which means closed source but free to use.

I’ll edit my comment for clarity, thanks for the heads up.

Projects leaching on the work of companies like that, “freeing the code”.

You mean it the other way, right? Because these companies you defend use the free labor of voluntary developers from the community, which spend hours and hours developing features, fixing bugs and what not, directly or indirectly. That’s how open source works.

When these companies change the project license to a closed source one, they’re basically saying a big “f*** you” to the community. Forking the latest open source version of the repository is nothing more than an effort to keep things the way they were.

huge companies will not pay a cent for Linux in the future

Linux is FOSS, you can do whatever you want with it as long as you redistribute it without modifying the license. Android does that; every GNU/Linux distribution does that. That’s how it works.

if a license says “you can use it for free, but need to share profits over x$”

What you’re describing is “freeware”, what this post is discussing is " open source software". There’s a giant gap between the two.

I think they mean EA Anti-Cheat, not Easy Anti-Cheat. The former, which is used in 2042, does not run under linux (and probably never will).

BFV runs out-of-the-box on linux systems and has a “Gold” rating on ProtonDB. If EA really goes on with this, BFV will become unplayable, just like 2042.

Merry Christmas OP! I’ll pick Persona 5 Royal

Here’s what made me happy this year:

• I got married!
• I landed my first job as a programmer (and got promoted a month after)

Happy holidays everyone

Yeah, sure. Totally different from having backdoors to the NSA or collecting massive amounts of personal data for targeted ads.

EDIT: You can’t trust ANY company if your concern is privacy; your data is just too profitable (for them) to sit there untouched.

And a really good song

He’s a billionaire, probably thinks he pays us peasants too much for what we deliver, and would absolutely replace us for slaves if he could

I’d love to see PeerTube grow just like these platforms, but I think it’s a lot more complicated to get people to use it than mastodon/lemmy.

Twitter/Reddit weren’t used as a major income source like YouTube and Instagram (I am saying this based on famous people in my country, I don’t know how it goes on other places), and so are easier to replace. The people posting and discussing topics don’t do that for the money, they do because they like it.

YT and its monetization system made possible for people to make a living from the content they produce, and many wouldn’t like or simply couldn’t sacrifice this income source just to go to a more ethical and private platform like PeerTube.

I hope this repeats and big franchises have movies/shows delayed or cancelled, as it seems to be the only way to get these pigs’ attention

Yeah, it doesn’t add up. Why would one go to the restricted access distributor if they can get a lot more by pirating?

Why can’t we have nice things? These people are literally just archiving and preserving old media, and if I recall correctly, they have strict rules of sharing these archived media.

I kinda understand why they got sued by Wiley/HarperCollins due to breaking the rules of sharing unlimited copies of archived books, but this time it doesn’t look like it.

Honestly, I hope Internet Archive survives all these lawsuits they’re dealing with

Genuine question: what’s the real problem? As a non-american, I can’t get it.

I mean, it’s not like they’re smuggling these chips to China, but doing a legitimate acquisition. Don’t want them to get access to U.S. tech? Simply don’t sell it to any other country that buys/sells to China, since they could trade or resell those chips to them. Also, AFAIK most international trades are done using U.S. dollars, so limiting U.S. companies from trading won’t solve the problem.

I’m not an economist, so feel free to correct me

Sorry if it sounded rude (and yeah, it was kind of a rant, sorry). What I’m trying to say is: these people do much worse things and don’t bother to say “sorry” publicly. The only way to make them behave is to fine them by a huge amount, just like Norway did.

I’m against the trained models being used for profit with no credit or cut given to the humans who trained it.

Sorry mate, hell’s gonna get cold before this happens. We’re talking about the biggest moth******ers on earth since always. Do you think Meta/[insert big tech company name here] will start to behave all of the sudden? These people literally KILL people everyday for a profit (looking at you Instagram).

The only way to get something from these scumbags is fining them something like 100k per hour, until they start respecting people’s privacy

Well, I guess we’ll have to follow Norway’s steps if we want to get somewhere. But yeah, I highly doubt anything beyond asking big tech to behave will be done

They probably don’t, but they have families to feed, so it’s better to follow the guidelines and lie to a bunch of anonymous people on the internet rather than have your wife and kids beating you up after losing your job due to “not being evil enough”

None of these corporations can be trusted at all IMO, simply because they’re corporations in the first place, and WILL always choose what’s better for them rather than what’s better for the community. That’s why I advocate for open source every time I can.

And OK, everything you said is true and valid, but go ahead and try to convice the non-tech people to delete their accounts, while explaining all the little comforts they have will be taken away with it. They’ll simply laugh at you and carry on. That’s how Google and other corporations that follow this “free services” model got so big and influential, and now they’re using their size to do what corporations do: increase profits.

Another problem with this model is you can’t really tell what Google is doing with the data they collect. Can you/anybody tell Google didn’t feed their Bard AI data they collected from you? Can you/anybody tell Google ain’t using your/their data for anything except showing targeted ads? AFAIK, you can’t. Even if they update their ToS regularly, communicate you they’ve changed it and “if you continue using the service it means you agreed with the new Terms of Service”, do you really think people will actually take the time to read the same 20 page ToS every time it changes? Most people I know don’t even read it the first time!

In the end, you may say they’re being as ethical as possible, and the users are simply too lazy and everything bad that happens to them is entirely their own fault. You wouldn’t be wrong at all, but that’s not how the world works.

Also, sorry for the wall of text.

You have good points, and yeah, I too want data privacy and everything, but the Fediverse in general always was a niche place. I mean, people only got to know this because the mainstream social media fucked up badly this time (and keeps doing it very well). Now we have thousands of new instances, users and everything, but no one was prepared for it.

My point is: your proposals are totally valid, but there was no need for this level of security until yesterday, since this was just a niche place with a couple hundreds of users. Give it a few months and we might get some updates on instance infrastructure and the ActivityPub protocol itself to make it safer.

I read this with Samuel L. Jackson’s voice and it sounds motherfucking cool