OneMeaningManyNames

Full time smug prick

  • 34 Posts
  • 202 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2024

help-circle






  • OneMeaningManyNames@lemmy.mltolinuxmemes@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    4 months ago

    “/c/[insert_community_name]” is not necessarily linking that community, only invoking it to illustrate a point. “Badlinguistics” was a popular community on the other website for discussing comments like yours.

    Well here it is not that popular. It has two members and since you are not the mod, you are probably the one. Since there are no posts why don’t you write proper essays instead of attacking random people on Lemmy. I am not gonna respond to this shit.

    English is a human language, ok fucker? But it is an uncommon one, thus making it hard to generalize from English to other languages. This is well known in linguistics. I would bother to get you some quote, but I prefer to leave you seething here.


  • the notion that I wrote anything resembling “by definition every open source license is a copyleft license” is nonsense

    Let’s see.

    “Open Source” is a term coined by the Open Source Initiative, and they control its definition. Every license that counts as “Open Source” according to OSI also counts as Free Software according to the Free Software Foundation.

    This is the same thing. To quote someone very important:

    Words have meanings. You don’t get to just change them and pretend they mean the same things when they don’t!


  • OneMeaningManyNames@lemmy.mltolinuxmemes@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    You can make derivative works with CC-BY-SA.

    No.

    No, copyright law itself restricts people from sharing code. “Open Source” or “Free Software” licenses relax those restrictions. Restrictions are never added by the license, only conditions limiting when they may be relaxed.

    This is exactly why copyleft licenses are now implemented within the context of intellectual property law. You can’t have a socialist biodome specifically for code.

    CC-BY-SA is also not, in fact, “Open Source” because it doesn’t appear on the list of OSI-approved Open Source licenses.

    Any license that prohibits modification will do. As any license that prohibits redistribution under a closed license will also do.

    EDIT: “do” = to refute your statement, from which you just so vehemently distanced yourself, lmao


  • OneMeaningManyNames@lemmy.mltolinuxmemes@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    Every license that counts as “Open Source” according to OSI also counts as Free Software according to the Free Software Foundation.

    Who is not authoritative on the issue. I might agree with the spirit of your comment, but I think it messes up an “ought to” with an “is a”. Let’s replay this: Every open source license should be a copyleft license. Sure! It should. Like all property should belong to the community.

    But as it is right now, the creator has intellectual property on the code. They may choose to reserve none or some rights on it. But as long as F/L/OSS is defined within the framework of intellectual property, it is not true that “by definition every open source license is a copyleft license”. This is a fallacy.

    (Sorry I wouldn’t bother to use the same terms you used. I mean the same things though.)


  • OneMeaningManyNames@lemmy.mltolinuxmemes@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    Any licenses that restrict what you can do are neither

    I am not so sure. What about CC-BY-SA? Open source, share-alike, but restricts modifying the code. More broadly, from the start CC licenses were described as “Some rights reserved”.

    Libre software restricts people from sharing code under another closed license. So I think that your statement is not correct either. FLOSS licenses can very much restrict what you can do, and do so very regularly.


  • OneMeaningManyNames@lemmy.mltolinuxmemes@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    This is not correct. In typical use, copyleft means that you have to redistribute it as free software (GPL and variations). The opposite is “permissive”, you can use the software commercially, and charge others to use it as closed source. Copyleft is good for developers, permissive is good for companies.

    So “free as in speech” is not even a good analogy. “Liberated” is more like it, perhaps I will start using libre more strictly…





  • OneMeaningManyNames@lemmy.mltolinuxmemes@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    Ambiguity is inherent in all human languages, agreed. But English is one of the most fucked up languages, and in many ways different than most other languages.

    Possible reason: it is a hybrid language over-prescribed by racist and classist institutions, which currently serves as a lingua-franca and still rapidly evolves because of all the tech and marketing that happens in the US (in other words, what the fuck is a “slopometer”).




  • “The SPLC was not dismantling these groups. It was instead manufacturing the extremism it purports to oppose by paying sources to stoke racial hatred,” Blanche said.

    The SPLC said it “will vigorously defend ourselves, our staff, and our work” against what it described as false allegations. The group said its informant program saved lives.

    “Taking on violent hate and extremist groups is among the most dangerous work there is, and we believe it is also among the most important work we do,” interim CEO and president Bryan Fair said in a statement.

    Well, now the most extremist of these groups is the US Government. The authoritarian power grab continues.



  • I’m going to bring it up.

    Isn’t this the same asshole who posted the “Woke racist” meme as a response to Gemini generating images of Black SS officers? Of course we now know he was merely triggered by the suggestion because of his commitment to white supremacy and alignment with the SS ideals, which he could not stand to see, pun not intended, denigrated.

    The Gemini ordeal was itself a result of a system prompt; a half-ass attempt to correct for white bias deeply learned by the algorithm, just a few short years after Google ousted their AI ethics researcher for bringing this type of stuff up.

    Few were the outlets that did not lend credence to the “outrage” about “diversity bias” bullshit and actually covered that deep learning algorithms are indeed sexist and racist.

    Now this nazi piece of shit goes ahead and does the exact same thing; he tweaks a system prompt causing the bot to bring up the self-serving and racially charged topic of apartheid racists being purportedly persecuted. He does the vary same thing he said was “uncivilizational”, the same concept he brought up just before he performed the two back-to-back Sieg Heil salutes during Trump’s inauguration.

    He was clearly not concerned about historical accuracy, not the superficial attempt to brown-wash the horrible past of racism which translates to modern algorithms’ bias. His concern was clearly the representation of people of color, and the very ideal of diversity, so he effectively went on and implemented his supremacist seething into a brutal, misanthropic policy with his interference in the election and involvement in the criminal, fascist operation also known as DOGE.

    Is there anyone at this point that is still sitting on the fence about Musk’s intellectual dishonesty and deeply held supremacist convictions? Quickest way to discover nazis nowadays really: (thinks that Musk is a misunderstood genius and the nazi shit is all fake).