@mjg59 @dpk I need to be able to refer to and disambiguate between both meanings ("any operating system using Linux" and "any operating system using Linux with a normal POSIX-y userspace") and I think it would make more sense to invent a new phrase for the latter. Otherwise I don't know what to refer to the former as ("It's a distribution and it uses Linux but it isn't a Linux distribution" seems... weird)

@mjg59 @dpk I would count Android (and other systems with Linux and an non-POSIX-y userspace¹) as a Linux distribution. Other than perhaps using a non-mainline kernel, I don't see why Android wouldn't count.

If they're not Linux distributions, what are operating systems that use Linux with an alternative userspace called?

¹ This is not purely hypothetical. I am thinking of a specific proposal for a non-POSIX-y userspace for Linux which I cannot currently link here because the host of the git repo is down and it's not in archive.org (or anywhere else as far as I know).

@dpk @mjg59 There should be a word that includes GNU/Linux distributions as well as things with a normal POSIX-y userspace like Alpine and Chimera, but not Android. That's often what people mean, but there's no short way to refer to it.

@SeaDonut @nay @vozercozer It does have one major problem: it’s proprietary and they refuse to publish UI source code because they’re afraid of forks. I wouldn’t even consider it for this reason.

I’m probably going to try Nyxt whenever they implement WebExtensions.

@fediplayssnake I'm not sure which way is left and which is right. Is it relative to the fox or to the map?

I love how Mozart was the first music pirate, who transcribed — from memory — Gregorio Allegri’s “Miserere” in 1771.

He went to a performance of it, and then went straight home to write down the notation. The sheet music was only allowed be owned by, like, three people… I think one of which was the Holy Roman Emperor at the time.

Mozart, the badass, then published the sheet music.

His sheer gumption was so welcomed that the Pope gave him the Order of the Golden Spur.

So remember: whenever you pirate something, you are following in the footsteps of Mozart himself.

@cwg1231 @alexia I assume you're suggesting using OQL + selling exceptions to it to companies in order to earn money? Since just using OQL and not doing that isn't going to help to earn any money.

Many people use the AGPL and sell exceptions, it's not necessary to use a non-free license for this. I don't particularly like this practice and would avoid contributing to such software because it requires a CLA of some sort which gives the maintainer more rights over the code than anyone else, which are often abused to go completely proprietary (most recently: minio), but it's better than proprietary software.

@alexia @cwg1231 Because not everyone is going to ignore the law, but anyone who's already ignoring the law (by violating human rights) is probably fine with ignoring copyright law too.

The GPL is useful despite the existence of some companies (like Allwinner) that continue to violate it, and it being reviewed by a lawyer is important because an overly broad clause could make everyone accidentally violate the license (which would make the license meaningless and equivalent to all-rights-reserved).

I think the clause of the OQL prohibiting materially supporting violators of human rights could plausibly be interpreted as prohibiting anyone who pays taxes from using the software, and this makes using any OQL-licensed software risky since the copyright holder could arbitrarily decide to sue you/tell you to stop using the software for this.

Another thing you could to to scare off companies from using your software without actually making it non-free is to require some sort of manifesto (similar to the GPL's preamble, or the Invariant Sections in various GNU manuals) to be distributed verbatim along with your software. Make it something that no company would want to distribute.

@cwebber @mlemweb How usable is it by itself? The screen and keyboard both look tiny

@alexia @cwg1231 Please don’t use a proprietary software license. Entities that ignore human rights law are likely to also ignore copyright law, restrictions on use in copyright licenses simply should not exist (I think the FSF article explains this well), and if everyone puts different use restrictions we’re going to end up with thousands of slightly different possibly-incompatible licenses.

Also, that specific license doesn’t seem to have been reviewed by a lawyer. I noticed several problems (I am not a lawyer):

• It appears be written in such a way that would prohibit even distributing the software on a physical medium (like a CD) for the cost of the physical medium.
• “No entity that commits such abuses or materially supports entities that do may use the Work for any reason.” seems overly broad and like it would prevent anyone who pays taxes (to a government which commits human rights abuses) from using the Work.

If you want to scare off companies, just use the AGPL. It’s a free software license and companies seem to be scared of it (Google doesn’t allow use of any AGPL software apparently)

@elly @Rairii @ipg Is there any actual hardware difference between the chipsets that support AMT and those that don't, or is it just software?

@benjojo @manawyrm is the 4MB drive actually usable for storage?

@ezio what's a crunkulator?

@nay hardware maintenance manual

@fun @postmarketOS UI poll is, init system poll doesn't let me choose more than one

@fun @postmarketOS why isn't this a multiple-choice poll? (you can't use both on the same installation, but you can have multiple devices with postmarketOS)

@ariadne why not peertube?

@dngrs @ariadne that's what a DCO is for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developer_Certificate_of_Origin. Linux and Coreboot both use one.

CLAs mean that companies can take open source software and privatize it.

https://github.com/minio/minio?tab=readme-ov-file#maintenance-mode