Yes the mere existence of slop machines is totally forcing those developers to shit all over their painstakingly crafted creations and deliberately hiding it. Really hard to argue with that.

If its such a bother to create something without supporting these fascist enabling and thieving cunts that are all AI companies, maybe they should consider not doing anything at all.

Turns out GloriousEggroll who is best known for Nobara and GE-Proton is defending this shit as well.

Source

Aubergines, cucumbers, kiwi, and citrusfruit are botanical berries as well. The correct answer is that berry should be seen as a culinary term just like fruit and vegetable.

The difference being that Motorola is a well established device manufacturer and not just a community project with minimal funding. Google using play integrity to exclude a competitor could be very easily seen as an abuse of market power and they already have problems with antitrust laws.

No alternative codecs wont do, the application we are building has a hard dependency on these specific dlls due to another dependency requiring them. It was also just one example of many excuse my hyperbole. Here is another one, try to get winget to work with a local package cache. You have to go to some third party developer for that. Want another one? How about debugging windows binaries in an offline environment. Reasonable requirement? Microsoft says no.

Why is this arbitrarily “a whole different story” and who said anything about UWP, it’s the media codecs we depend on. Windows 10 N offered an offline installer for that “optional feature” and now Microslop makes my life more difficult for no reason at all.

Ok, where can I download the Media Feature Pack for Windows 11 N as an offline installer?

At my job we are working with a few air gapped Windows machines which is already really annoying because Microslop doesn’t offer offline installers for anything related to Windows 11 anymore. I expect this to get even more difficult over time.

Also:

I never said that you can remove a license retroactively. A CLA is an assignment of copyright from the contributor to the company. The only reason for a company to add a CLA to a project is to put a rug under the project which they will pull as soon as they gained a critical mass of users. It fundamentally undermines the social contract of open source development. These companies want to enjoy all the benefits of open source, like the market appeal and the free labour, but none of the drawbacks. A CLA is just one thing, a promise that the project will go non-free in the future.

Let me introduce you to the magical concept of the CLA. It means they can do whatever they want with the project but you can not. You should never contribute to CLA projects.

Yes its kind of possible with F# and Fable. I did it a few years ago. I say kind of because its still transpiling to javascript.

It was horse shit when jakearchibald wrote it; its still horse shit now.

Very very simple.

Really? I find it quite feature packed for a notes taking app.

Here are a few more:

logseq

Its an outliner, a colleague of mine basically lives in that thing.

silverbullet

It’s almost perfect for me but the browser based editing made it unusable because there is no way to unmap Ctrl + W in a browser and I can’t live without my Vim bindings.

QOwnNotes

This is the solution for normal people who don’t spend n+1 hours tweaking their editor configuration.

Org-Roam

For people who do spend n+1 hours tweaking their emacs configuration.

Document the features and requirements, then rewrite it with proper architecture and without LLMs.

Time to post it again.

The Trine series is really pretty and even the newest entry has relatively modest hardware requirements.

That’s a fun idea but AI companies would probably just screenshot the website and OCR the text if this became common. It’s also really inconvenient for the users as it breaks both copy pasting and Ctrl+F searching.

You can target the crawlers using tar pits and proof-of-work application firewalls but I am doubtful that poisoning does anything. The second a poisoning method becomes common enough to have an effect the AI companies will just start filtering for that. Unfortunately the only way I see that prevents your work from being stolen is to either not publish it at all, or to only publish to smaller invite based communities that closely monitor who is accepted.

I don’t get how this is manufacturing consent, seems pretty matter of fact to me. What should they have written instead, if they can’t determine who exactly is responsible for that attack?