• 1 Post
  • 460 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 14th, 2023

help-circle





  • Case in point, I have no clue what you wrote, but the intent is clear:

    What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I’m the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking dead, kiddo.


  • hedgehog@ttrpg.networktolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldLinux
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Not sure why you’ve gotten downvoted for that, as it’s part of the referenced rule and also true. Unless you’re someone who sees a word in a foreign language and has their brain turn off in response, this should be intelligible to someone who understands English and who doesn’t understand Spanish.

    It helps that more than half the words are in English / are used by English speakers: Steam, Proton, Grand Theft Auto 5, Gabe Newell, Linux Mint, Microsoft, Windows, RAM, 100 FPS, 75 FPS

    And the important Spanish words are easy to understand:

    “Gracias” is pretty commonly understood even by bon-Spanish speakers.

    “Uso Software Libre” is pretty obvious, since Libre is a term used in FOSS communities. “Uso” is the most complicated part and I suspect if I didn’t know Spanish I’d just think it meant “Use,” and “Use Libre Software!” is close enough to the intended meaning

    Unless Telemetria doesn’t mean Telemetry, it’s pretty obvious.

    If I blanked out all the other Spanish words I think the effect would be pretty much the same.


  • How is that an assumption at all? If you provide the same amount of infrastructure for bikes as for cars, then you still have half the infrastructure for cars, so people can use both / either.

    And for those of us living in places where we don’t have bike friendly infrastructure, it’s useful to be able to point out that converting car infra to bike infra would have the capacity to reduce congestion, particularly if the area commits to making those changes more widely.


  • I’m a professional software engineer and I’ve been in the industry since before Kubernetes was first released, and I still found it overwhelming when I had to use it professionally.

    I also can’t think of an instance when someone self-hosting would need it. Why did you end up looking into it?

    I use Docker Compose for dozens of applications that range in complexity from “just run this service, expose it via my reverse proxy, and add my authentication middleware” to “in this stack, run this service with my custom configuration, a custom service I wrote myself or forked, and another service that I wrote a Dockerfile for; make this service accessible to this other service, but not to the reverse proxy; expose these endpoints to the auth middleware and for these endpoints, allow bypassing of the auth middleware if an API key is supplied.” And I could do much more complicated things with Docker if I needed to, so even for self-hosters with more complex use cases than mine, I question whether Kubernetes is the right fit.



  • You have it backwards.

    • Day 2 Purchase
    • Day 1 “Theft”

    Chronologically, the “theft” comes first. And you can easily purchase something you previously stole.

    Theft is in scare quotes because piracy isn’t theft and I’m assuming OP isn’t going to actually steal someone’s Steam Deck, Switch, or Switch game cartridge… but maybe I’m wrong.

    (Also you could “steal” it after purchasing it by buying on one platform and pirating it on another, but that’s a separate matter.)





  • I don’t think there’s any room to argue that announcing a 1.x with a change the developers say is a breaking change, which is what Immich have done, fits within the semver.org guidelines.

    That wasn’t the argument.

    Following semver is optional. If a project doesn’t explicitly state it is following semver, it shouldn’t be assumed that it is. With regard to Immich in particular, a cursory review of their documentation makes it clear that they are not following semver. Literally, go to https://immich.app/ and read the text at the very top of the page:

    ⚠️ The project is under very active development. Expect bugs and changes.

    Go to the repo and you’ll see the README, which states at the very top:

    • ⚠️ The project is under very activedevelopment.
    • ⚠️ Expect bugs and breaking changes.

    If you can read that, see that they’re on major version 1 with a minor version over 100, and you still think they’re using semver, then that’s on you.

    The devs have stated they won’t be using semver until they consider Immich production ready, and that moving to a 1.x version from 0.x was a mistake made some time ago. If you want to think about it as though it is semver, consider the major version to still be 0. See https://github.com/immich-app/immich/discussions/5086#discussioncomment-7593227 for example.

    As this project is clearly not following semver, the semver guidelines aren’t applicable and haven’t been violated.

    I don’t think there’s any room to argue

    Even if semver were applicable, in this case, I would still disagree. The text from semver.org states:

    8. Major version X (X.y.z | X > 0) MUST be incremented if any backward incompatible changes are introduced to the public API.

    It doesn’t state that any backward incompatible changes, period, require a major version increase, only changes to the public API. I would personally argue that the deployment configuration is part of the public API, but not all project owners agree with me. Even if they do agree, they might say that this was not a documented deployment configuration and thus not part of the public API, and that it therefore doesn’t necessitate an increase to the major version, but as they knew that people were using that configuration, anyway, they included a note about a potentially breaking change as a courtesy to those users.




  • Copyright applies to unfinished works, too. There are many reasons it might not protect an unfinished work, but those reasons are still relevant even for finished works.

    If someone steals your physical drawing, that’s theft. If they take a picture of it, then use the picture - or your picture + modifications - without your permission, particularly in a commercial work, then that’s copyright infringement, but not theft. If they steal your physical drawing and then take a picture and so on, then it’s both theft and copyright infringement.

    Most likely this wasn’t considered copyright infringement because the allegedly copied art isn’t copyrightable, e.g., game mechanics; or the plaintiff didn’t own the copyrights themselves and thus couldn’t sue (possibly the arts were still copyrighted by the original artists, having never been purchased; possibly they were stock assets that were re-purchased by the defendant). There are any number of reasons. However, “the work wasn’t published” isn’t one of them.

    On the other hand, it’s quite likely they were able to sue for theft of trade secrets for that very reason. And they might have chosen to do that simply because proving copyright infringement is much more difficult.