knorker

6 ms·

1.
by knorker 4d ago
As someone who did train one of the traditional martial arts for a few years, I appreciate the comparison. I don't know how much weight your "just" is meant to carry, but I remember a culture of cope and excuses about why &qu
2.
by knorker 5d ago
Well, for one it breaks right click and copy link location.
3.
by knorker 6d ago
Again, that only works for large companies, and for companies that can exists even if their service is downloadable. Which fine, you can choose to take that political stance. But that's a stance of "I want to change the world to
4.
by knorker 9d ago
This means you have only solved the problem for large companies, and specifically those who have money and who have a functioning procurement system that's developer-driven. Which is a very narrow use case. Also relevant comment: ht
5.
by knorker 9d ago
Sure, but for anything except large companies it has a bootstrapping problem. I'm absolutely not going to use AGPL software in a test one-person trying to sell a service kind of deal. So if it takes off, I'm already on a non-AGPL
6.
by knorker 9d ago
Yup. As I said in another comment "I treat AGPL as a rabies infected animal. I may have uses for it, but I'll keep it EXTREMELY segregated from everything else".
7.
by knorker 9d ago
Could you please take my question at face value? > I chose to do it for free to help other people. And picking a MIT license does the opposite. I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. I want to help other people, then giving them t
8.
by knorker 10d ago
Not really "one disadvantage" as much as "the main use case".
9.
by knorker 10d ago
What's the difference to you between a rug pull and theft?
10.
by knorker 10d ago
Do we really need the latest kernel on them, though? As in, is it worth it? In 100 years, if we need to run kernel 6.12 to use a 3c509, is that all that bad? It's not like being "stuck" on an old IRIX without the proprietary
11.
by knorker 10d ago
Huh? You release code so that people will have to rewrite it? I really don't understand what your goal would be in releasing code at all, then.
12.
by knorker 10d ago
Which could make the business untenable. I'm not GP commenter, but I do want to be useful to these too. And as others have said the deceptive term of "plugging the SaaS loophole" ignores that it means most software cannot be
13.
by knorker 10d ago
Do you have data on that last bit, or just a guess? As a hobbyist and OSS developer I treat AGPL as a rabies infected animal. I may have uses for it, but I'll keep it EXTREMELY segregated from everything else.
14.
by knorker 10d ago
> Over the years it has been clear that we in the “open source” camp (as opposed to the “free software” camp) were wrong all along. No. YOU changed your mind, to become less free and more authoritarian. > gained little for users What?
15.
by knorker 21d ago
It was one vote away from going Thomas's way, so I wouldn't say it doesn't matter what he thinks. As a non-american, I would have enjoyed the precedent that the logical conclusion had to be that I would not be subject to the
16.
by knorker 23d ago
I also find it useful to see someone's progression. Newer posts on a topic from the same person will usually have clearer thinking about it.
17.
by knorker 23d ago
I disagree with removing timestamps. It's extremely frustrating to read some technical post somewhere only to finally see that it was written in 2008. The very first thing I read now on that site when looking for a good example of this
18.
by knorker 26d ago
If there's anything that's anachronistic, it's native apps. You want it graphical: Make a webapp. You don't: Make a TUI. What exactly is the use case for native apps? Even lots of legacy code can build to WASM now. (yes,
19.
by knorker 27d ago
So wrong. They're fast, efficient, work across SSH, in a tmux, and survive the almost daily browser upgrades. And they are easy to run as separate users without VNC or sandbox hell. Like do you want to think about X/Wayland isolat
20.
by knorker 27d ago
This reminds me how I've had to tell people to try to type better and nt us wird abbrvs, even if it means they can type it faster. Because if you want 100 people to read it, then every second you waste for the reader is worth you fixin
21.
by knorker 1mo ago
> Their employee base in Washington has almost no american born engineers. Was that a sharp turn, or was it related in some way?
22.
by knorker 1mo ago
I don't feel like power users are catered to either. Like if you have a Google workspace account (if you're not a company, that's a power user) then you can't do "remind me to X". That's reserved for non-p
23.
by knorker 1mo ago
NSA chief also says water is wet.
24.
by knorker 2mo ago
Having the word "secure" as part of the product name is pretty brave, especially if you're Cisco.
25.
by knorker 2mo ago
Sure, but you could have done that without pimpl, too. At least without defaulted or inlined constructors/destructors/etc.
26.
by knorker 2mo ago
I read the parent commenter as proposing headroom. Because if it's an exact match, then it doesn't help at all with ABI compat, and arguably doesn't add anything. Well, aside from compile time, but that's maybe better so
27.
by knorker 2mo ago
Not sure what toolchain has to do with your code retaining ABI compat like size. Nor how dynamic linked library helps. Dynamic linked libraries are exactly the ones that have the most use for pimpl to maintain ABI compat.
28.
by knorker 2mo ago
Yup, agree that in some cases this fixes it. Indeed, in another comment[1] on this comment branch I said "Not everyone works at Google and builds all binaries from scratch from a monorepo every time". So you're only trying to
29.
by knorker 2mo ago
I've been thinking about things like that a bit. I see a very useful and safe Rust pattern, and wonder if I can possibly implement it in C++. Mostly the answer is no, because C++ is too powerful. I would love to proved wrong, but every
30.
by knorker 2mo ago
Not everyone works at Google and builds all binaries from scratch from a monorepo every time. And even then, maybe even Google doesn't rebuild libstdc++ as part of this. GNURadio consistently uses pimpl for blocks, as I understand it m

More ›