we wish to grow the fediverse, so let's cut off part of it. hmm, nope, that can't be it. the notion of interoperability is so that even someone using software with a tiny user base can still interoperate. and we're not talking about developing a compatibility layer, we're talking about removing one that was there, that enabled us to talk to grandpa while he slowly caught up
we love activitypub because compatibility is important to us, that's why we're going to kill compatibility with grandpa. he's been too slow to catch up. hmm, still not sounding defensible, is it?
we can't afford to keep another language in our minds just to talk to grandpa. if we don't abandon him now, we're all going to die. hmm, nope, others even retained compatibility.
no urgency, no compatibility excuse. all I can see is an asshole move to terminate grandpa
your denouncement of power of copyright holders, that you mistake for owners, is misguided on at least two accounts: (i) GPLv3 has provisions for projects to appoint a trustworthy proxy to approve later versions, and your failure to mention that is either dishonest or poorly-informed, and neither supports the false notion you attempt to denounce; (ii) the power to enforce respect for freedom is the opposite of ownership, it only resembles ownership from the POV of someone who is attempting to avail oneself of unjust ownership rights. copyleft only imposes restrictions on those who would otherwise impose restrictions on others
but I'll oblige. it's a sacrifice I'm willing to make.
have you ever tried to access a cloudflare site through Tor? you get a captcha, you fill it in, you get another captcha, and so on, indefinitely. I call it the Tor-Turing Test
hmm, I object a little to that stance. resistance to a hostile takeover attempt of a name is not best served by ceding the name, IMHO, but by insisting on its original, intended meaning
it is accurate indeed. what's not accurate, and is a common source of disagreement, is the misrepresentation and rewriting of history that some people engage in. it's not just that Linux is not an operating system (Mr Torvalds set out to write one but ended up writing a kernel and adopting GNU for the userland), it's that Linux hasn't even qualified as FS (or OSS) after Mr Torvalds started integrating binary-only blobs in his Linux distribution, and that was before OSS was even coined!
tee: think of a capital T, a T-shirt, rotated 90 degrees clockwise. data comes in from the left, the opening for the body, gets duplicated and comes out from both sleeves
no que eso sea particularmente importante para la discusión inicial. gimp es un subproyecto importante de GNU, pero quizás no sea algo que se considere un componente esencial de un sistema operativo. hay sistemas operativos muy exitosos que ni siquiera interfaz gráfica tenían, o tienen. no es así con GNU, así que GIMP puede correr bien como parte de GNU, sea o no parte del proyecto, pero eso no tiene que ver con el nombre con el cuál se llama el sistema operativo incluido en las distros del sistema operativo GNU con el nucleo Linux, ¿sí? ¿vamos a dejar esas distracciones y volver al tema?
> hard to pass negative consequences onto the delivery *this*. if you can't hold the company accountable for ensuring the good got delivered to the intended recipient, why would a psychopath-by-design care if the intended recipient got it?
I believe current procedures, that involve not only collecting signatures, but often sending passwords to the intended recipients, through side channels, just before delivery, are intended both to protect the delivery company and its insurer from fraudsters who might falsely claim the goods were not delivered, but even from dishonest associates who might otherwise be tempted to "deliver" stuff, pick it back up, and then "deliver" it again at their own places
the post office here will attempt delivery up to 3 times. if they can't find a person to pick it up, they'll leave a note, and the intended recipient will then have to pick it up at the post office