• 2 Posts
  • 25 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 10th, 2023

help-circle









  • moonpiedumplings@programming.devtoOpensource@programming.devThe DeVault Report
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    FYI, DeVault’s Stallman Report explicitly attacks the FSF as well as Stallman.

    I read the report. You are free to show me exactly where it criticizes the FSF beyond their interactions with Stallman.

    I took it mean that the report was such a deceitful and irrational work, presented in such a duplicitous manner as to constitute an attack on the senses of the community.

    I’ll just copy my older comment, and put it here

    Begin quote:

    Stallman doesn’t seem to get that pedophilia is wrong because of the hierarchy of power, and the power imbalances between older/younger people, not because of some inherent wrongness about being attracted to a prepubescent person. This is shown by how he condemns some pedophilia, but is accepting of 12+/past puberty. (I despise this logic, because it would also make gay sex and sodomy wrong, as well).

    I find this deeply ironic, because his primary issue with proprietary software is the way that it gives developers levels of power over users. From his article Why Open Source Misses the Point

    But software can be said to serve its users only if it respects their freedom. What if the software is designed to put chains on its users? Then powerfulness means the chains are more constricting, and reliability that they are harder to remove.

    You would expect someone who is so in tune with the hierarchies that appear with software developers, publishers, and users, to also see those same hierarchies echoed in relationships between people of vastly different ages, but instead, we get this. I’m extremely disappointed.

    These failures to understand hierarchy and power, are exactly why Stallman shouldn’t be in a position of power. Leaders should continually prove that they understand hierarchy and the effects of their actions on those below them. Someone who doesn’t understand how their power could affect another, shouldn’t be a leader.

    End quote.

    And I’ll add onto this a little bit: Although Stallman seems to have redacted his earlier claim about pederasty, continuing to defend the legality of the possession of CSAM (beyond safe harbor/hospitality provisions), is very problematic, and clearly shows that he hasn’t learned his lesson. CSAM ownership should be heavily disincentivized, to disincentivize the selling/buying of CSAM, as that’s one of the most effective ways to stop more CSAM production.

    I don’t view pointing out that Stallman is not fit for a position of leadership to be an “attack” on the FSF or the free software community. And although the information gathering of the linked post is very, very impressive, it doesn’t really invalidate what was said in the Stallman Report, or the Stallman Report’s core points.



  • Yeah. this was in high school, in my math class, and we were playing a math game.

    The way it worked, was that every table was a team, and each team had a “castle” drawn up onto the whiteboard. A random spinner was used to determine a team, who would then solve a problem the teacher assigned. If you successfully solved the problem, you could draw an X on another teams castle. 3 X’s mean that you are out.

    My team was out. But, since this was a class, we could still solve problems, and still draw X’s. Our table got selected to solve a problem, and I did successfully. I looked at the board, and realized that only two teams had a single X, every other team had either two or three. In other words, I could choose who won the game, even though I could not win.

    So, I started trying to get bids. I tried to get real money, but someone tried to scam me with some “draw the X first” nonsense. But, the other team offered to pay me four of the school’s fake money, and I accepted that and allowed them to win.

    I may not have won the game, but I certainly felt victorious that day.


  • Is installing a package as simple as $ nix install vscode ? And would it “just work”?

    You fool. You absolute buffoon. You’re doing it wrong. That’s the wrong command, and even if it was the right command, this method could cause issues down the road. It goes against the declarative philosophy of nix. You’re supposed to refer to packages by their attribute, rather than name. If you launch the installed app that way, it won’t have any hardware accererated graphics becuase hardware accelerated graphics are impure, don’t you know this?

    You need to read the nonexistent documentation to find all of this out, and then select a declarative solution, like home manager or nix-shell or nix develop, to install software, and nixgl to get hardware accelerated graphics for nix packages on non nix systems.

    (/s (ish) over)

    Yeah. Nix has some issues. If you just want more packages available, I would recommend distrobox.

    It’s a very powerful tool, and I use nix to manage all of my development environments, but it has some severe limitations that only have hacky workarounds. I could not get hardware accelerated nix packages to have a working dekstop entry. So instead, I have to type nixGLIntel gzdoom in my terminal when I want to play doom.

    In addition to that, the documentation is very poor.

    The other comments in this thread elaborate on these, and a few other issues.





  • As a someone who has used both Arch, and Debian, neither has less or more bugs.

    Debian has the same bugs, over the period of their stable release, and Arch has changing bugs (like a new set every update lol).

    Yes, Arch is going to get a lot more features. But it comes at the cost of “instability”. Which is not so much a lack of reliability but instead, how much the software changes. I remember a firefox bug that caused a crash when I attempt to drag bookmarks in my bookmarks bar around, which lasted for like a week — then it went away.

    The idea behind projects like Debian, is that for an entity that needs stability, you can simply work around the bugs, since you always know what and where they are. (Well, the actual intent is that entities write patches and submit them to Debian to fix the bugs but no one does that).

    Another thing: Debian Stable has more up to date packages than Ubuntu 20.04, and Ubuntu 22.04. This happens because Ubuntu “freezes” a Sid version, and those packages don’t get major updates for a while. So often, the latest Debian stable has newer packages than the older Ubuntu releases.



  • And before you start whining - again - about how you are fixing bugs, let me remind you about the build failures you had on big-endian machines because your patches had gotten ZERO testing outside your tree.

    As far as I know, the Linux Foundation does not provide testing infrastructure to it’s developers. Instead, corporations are expected to use their massive amount of resources to test patches across a variety of cases before contributing them.

    Yes, I think Kent is in the wrong here. Yes, I think Kent should find a sponsor or something to help him with testing and making his development more stable (stable in the sense of fewer changes over time, rather than stable as in reliable).

    But, I kinda dislike how the Linux Foundation has a sort of… corporate centric development. It results in frictions with individual developers, as shown here.

    Over all of the people Linus has chewed out over the years, I always wonder how many of them were independent developers with few resources trying to figure things out on their own. I’ve always considered trying to learn to contribute, but the Linux kernel is massive. Combined with the programming pieces I would have to learn, as well as the infrastructure and ecosystem (mailing list, patch system, etc), it feels like it would be really infeasible to get into without some kind of mentor or dedicated teacher.