fonix232

Adding support for two types of cookies instead of one (and having a default the browser sends to the site) isn’t black magic fuckery or some unachievable alchemical process. It’s done easily.

Are there no vehicle taxes in the US?

I just wish it was a native feature of browsers instead of something that is part of the page. Like, all the other permissions - camera, microphone, Bluetooth, USB, etc access - are native, why can’t be the “hey let me write some crap onto your device that other pages may or may not read” and “hey lemme see what I wrote onto your device when invoked from another website” requests be native too?

Anyone who had wealth, or had access to wealth equal to $50 million today (or more) since the 1980s should be thoroughly investigated, period, and if connections are found, any and all wealth confiscated, and used for foundations and programmes supporting victims of child/sex trafficking, exploited women, women’s health research, and so on.

The only model that should have access to finances ever is one you host. On your own hardware, ideally in a container separated from the internet (one container pulling in your financial data, one container serving the AI model, latter without internet access, just getting data from the former).

phone numbers were already an almost mandatory addition to new Google accounts. You need to set up 2FA when you make a new account, and the option to use an authenticator app is so well hidden… meanwhile Google still wants your phone number “to authenticate you”, even though it’s less secure than storing your password on a post it on your phone.

*Take this and go fuck yourself.

it’s not really a custom firmware, and it only works with a year old official fw.

No idea, I do not have a Snapmaker… I fell for the Bambu marketing and the lack of availability of good alternatives circa 2 years ago, and hopefully this X1C will serve me for the next two three years - but I am feeling the limitations of a single print head and the build volume.

Bambi’s contributions are marginal compared to all the prior IP they use (and wasn’t Prusa actually suing them for using a number of their patents without the rights?).

as for open patents: any patent that is expired or where the owner isn’t interested in enforcing uniqueness (many a things are patented yet in public domain!). by open I simply mean no licensing is required.

And yes, that’s precisely what Bambu does. Take open designs, public domain parts and bang them together until they got something working. Which is why I recommend people buy Prusa, not Bambu - reward with some extra spending the people who actually do the hard work, not the ones who swoop in at the end and try to undercut the actual innovators.

That’s where legal actions come into place.

I’ve managed to force multiple Chinese companies to release sources that were adamant they don’t have to, just by threatening to report them to the FSF and SFC - both bodies have been wildly successful in prosecuting licence breaches.

Also both the EU and the US have now precedents and laws in place that allow fast-tracking obvious licence violators’ blocking from the market. For a small Chinese company whose main target market is the west, it’s a major blow if their sales and export are blocked because they won’t release the source.

So they try to play hardball, but it’s like modern lifts - the moment you press the right buttons suddenly they do exactly what you want them to.

A fully correct statement is categorically a technically correct statement, therefore the two are not contradictory.

My next printer is definitely going to be a Snapmaker.

They one-upped Bambu with the fully open approach of the U1, did a better tool changing printer at a lower cost, and are now supporting the good fight. I really hope it’s not a publicity stunt before enshittification begins, but so far, I’m liking them a lot.

Fingers crossed for a slightly improved U1 - primarily, a larger print volume (I’d be super happy with a ~5cm increase in all directions, making it 320x320x320), which I’m buying the moment it becomes available.

Prusa is pricy because they make the de facto standards - including PrusaSlicer which is the base of OrcaSlicer/Bambu Studio.

Bambu can sell cheaper for two reason:

• limited research needed to make their own products - they’re just copying open patents and software, tuning it a little, and selling the package at manufacturing cost + profit margins
• the CCP pouring a shitton of money into companies to subsidise them and allow them to undercut western competition. Bambu makes a printer for $1000, CCP pays $600 of it, Bambu sells for $600 - $200 profit

AGPL can be closed too, the license bases the right to the source based on the access to the end product:

• GPLv2/v3 - if you have the binary executable output of the GPLv2/3 covered source, you must be granted access to the exact source used to make the binary. This applies to legitimately sourced binaries only - if you were to hack into a company’s servers and get a binary of a modified GPL product, this wouldn’t apply. But extracting a binary from a device you own IS a legitimate access (so e.g. if your phone uses U-boot, the manufacturer must grant you access to their modified U-Boot sources used to build the bootloader)

• AGPL - if you have (legitimate) access to a service you can request the source. This is so e.g. web services can be made into GPLed code where modifications must be released (negating the requirement of possession of a binary, since you can’t possess a binary that runs on a remote server). e.g. let’s say I run GTK app via browser using kasmVNC - if the app is GPL, I don’t have to provide the source, if it’s AGPL, I have to provide the source.

Small sidenote: distribution of modified source code of GPLv2/v3 covered projects is only mandatory to those who have access to a binary version of the modified sources.

e.g. if you take a GPLv2 covered project that is a simple HTTP server, and you give the binary nobody, then you’re not required to share the source (if the HTTP server is AGPL covered then you need to provide it to anyone who can access the HTTP service and requests the source).

This is an important distinction, as you can’t demand the source of a GPL project from someone who cloned it and made modifications to their own use without distributing a binary of those changes. If I fork Orca and make some changes, and showcase those as screenshots, you have absolutely no right to demand the source for it. If I were to send you a binary of Orca with my changes, then you’d have the right.

I mean this distinction is obviously not applicable here but I wanted to make sure the GPL summary is fully correct. Which is the best kind of correct.

Don’t let this man know the power of the 69

Yeah I guess I should’ve specified that when I said “bullshit regulations” I meant specifically the regulations that are truly bullshit, not that all regulations are bullshit. Freaking English and its many ways to interpret the same sentence because why could we have specificity, amirite?

I’m not talking about the banking regulatory system.

Fintech - non-bank-certified money institutes - have a lot of duplicate regulatory requirements. Things like: certify PCI-DSS for payment processing, BUT ALSO certified for some kind of local framework which matches PCI-DSS 99% but has its own certification process and expenses etc., so it’s not as simple as just “doing what’s required”.

Again, there’s a ton of regulations that are beneficial for the institutes and their customers, but there is also a lot of them that are hindrances because they’re duplicate or obsolete processes, red tape, and so on, stuff that serves little to no actual purpose but are essentially leftover regulations that have been superceded but not officially eliminated.

I think one show covers all the cases (if you take Lower Decks then all the good stuff has already happened and you’re living in the golden age of the Federation).

I personally would toss in Stargate Atlantis there too, just to have a selection of futuristic environments.