Congrats! Good luck not pooping.
daan
joined 1 year ago
Like $XDG_CONFIG_HOME and $XDG_DATA_HOME?
Is it just me or do large portions of this article feel AI-generated?
But anyone with access to source code licensed under GPL can legally redistribute said source code. One of the fundamental freedoms is that if you are given GPL-licensed source code, you can modify and redistribute it as much as you like.
I think the real problem might be that some of the work from Red Hat doesn't fall under the GPL, hence this wouldn't apply, but I'm not sure.
Or what if they only distribute it to companies that sign an agreement not to redistribute? Then they have the right to redistribute according to the GPL, but if they do, Red Hat will kick them out. This would seem like a way to circumvent the fundamental ideas behind the GPL and free software. If they do this, I can no longer be supportive of Red Hat in any way, and will likely have to distro-hop away from Fedora due to this misalignment of ideology.
Some additional information from Rocky Linux and Alma Linux, since many people (including me) are confused about the implications of this:
https://rockylinux.org/news/2023-06-22-press-release/ https://almalinux.org/blog/impact-of-rhel-changes/
Interestingly, Rocky Linux claims to be largely unaffected by this, while Alma Linux is desperately looking for alternative solutions.
It seems like no one really knows what the implications are, and we will just have to wait and see.
This is very annoying, because it makes it hard for other peers to connect with my server and it will make it harder to seed. This is bad, I will likely switch next year.
Probably yeah, but then Meta will have made yet another walled garden, and for some reason so many people seem to really love Meta and they will stay there. Then we'll be exactly where we are today. So the way I see it, this new plan from Meta means nothing, but I'm curious to see how things will go.
The fact that W3C defines the protocol doesn't stop large companies from doing whatever they want. Have a look at Google: their web browser has become so widely adopted that Google effectively controls what is considered part of the spec, not W3C.
If Meta's platform grows to become the biggest fediverse project, they will control the spec and others will either have to follow, or risk dropping out. This is just like how Firefox is forced to follow Google to ensure all websites work properly on Firefox, even if these sites don't comply with the spec.
I agree, I also make sure everything is fully local. I have separate subnets for the server that runs home assistant, the IoT devices, and the trusted home network. Then I have some firewall rules that ensure that the IoT network cannot communicate with the WAN or the trusted LAN network at all, only with home assistant.
We have some simple automations at home to turn on the boiler in the afternoon when we have an abundance of solar power, and some basic automation to turn off aquarium lights at night such that the fish can sleep. Anything more complex just becomes unreliable and annoying.
Being able to monitor energy usage is very useful. We can see how much our solar panels are producing and how much we are importing and exporting from the network. Based on this information we can decide whether we should start a dishwasher, washing machine, water boiler, air conditioning, etc. That way, we can save a lot of money by optimally making use of free solar energy.
Making sure you are still able to control everything when the network is down seems like a good idea.
In our house, the smart plugs have a physical button that can be used to toggle them on or off. The lights are still connected to a physical power switch, so they can be reset by flipping the switch a few times, in which case they will probably just act as a normal light. Air conditioning units have an IR remote.
I feel like I could ask ChatGPT to "write a fairy tale about Nix" to get the exact same article.