I suppose so, but in that case either red or yellow is a primary colour not both. And since we are viewing this on an addative screen red is the primary colour.

Yellow isn’t a primary colour.

The current GNU coreutils have been C for decades, and I am not aware of an instance where this was a limiting factor. The GNU coreutils can still be bundled with proprietary software. Just like some Linux distributions used to come bundled with proprietary Nvidia drivers.

Can you possibly find an example where the Licensing the rust coreutils under the GPL would be an issue? Or actually any example at all of where using the GPL is a bad thing?

MIT License isn’t giving up Open Source, as all Open Source projects with MIT prove it.

I literally just described an example of it giving up open source. Any project under the MIT (https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:Expat) license can become proprietary at any time and all development is no longer open source! How is my example of apple using FreeBSD without contributing not an example of giving up open source? If you would like I can find more examples. So far you havn’t given me any for your own evidence but I would like some so I can understand your argument better.

Also applogies for the late replies, I hope you don’t mind too much.

Oh okay thanks for the correction, I should revise my understanding of the difference between copyright and copyleft.

Does anyone actually have a working stratergy to pick up calls consistantly? I always have silent mode on (vibrate enabled) because I’m scared if I enable call sounds I will forget to turn it off when it really needs to be off.

Most of the time I ignore the vibration.

Because the license has other strengths as well.

What are it’s strengths?

So having an alternative that can be used easier in other software where GPL is a bit problematic is not a bad thing.

The GPL is only problematic when used alongside proprietary software, something we want to avoid. So far people have used the original coreutils for decades and it hasn’t been a problem.

If the GNU+linux operating software shifts towards a permissive license (like MIT) it makes way for companies such as Red Hat and Canonical to start making proprietary operating systems. This would be a massive shame to Linux since the whole community benefits a lot from their contributions.

And the MIT License isn’t giving up on more Open Source too. So there is an opportunity.

I described earlier exactly why the MIT license is giving up on open source software so allow me to repeat myself.

Think about comparing macos with aosp.

Since android used linux which is licensed under the GLP they had to make it open source and they contributed back to the open source community.

Macos on the other hand used a lot of software from freebsd and other bsd projects. Since freebsd isn’t free software macos never contributed back to the community since they didn’t have to.

Not using the GPL can result in less open source.

OK sure, but why should we give away an opportunity to get more open source software?

Not nessesarily think about comparing macos with aosp.

Since android used linux which is licensed under the GLP they had to make it open source and they contributed back to the open source community.

Macos on the other hand used a lot of software from freebsd and other bsd projects. Since freebsd isn’t free software macos never contributed back to the community since they didn’t have to.

Not using the GPL can result in less open source.

I argue that using MIT will mostly result in a worse outcome than the GPL since our goal should always be having as much FOSS software as possible. Allowing people to make proprietry software from open source software results in less open source software.

No. I’m talking about the free software foundations definition of free software. The mit license is an open source licence, not a free software license.

Anyway, I’m interested as to why you don’t think the MIT license is worse than the GPL.

Because it isn’t a free software license. Software licensed by the MIT license can be copied and made into proprietary software. Since (I hope) we agree proprietary software should be minimised licensing under a free software license ensures big tech can’t make there own corporate software from it without ever giving back.

I get scared by cold storage since you never know when it dies. After 20 years and finding that thing you wanted who knows if it’s kicked the bucket by then?

Why don’t you think the MIT license is bad?

Why would you? You won’t be able to replicate the custom hardware, drivers and software. Why not just build an sff pc?

I’ve never heard or thought about bells it sounds like they would be pretty effective.

After some research, which is hard to do with most websites trying to tell you there shitty product will stop hunting better than everyone else’s. It looks like there aren’t any studies that say bells reduce hunting more than 50%. Most cats just find ways around jiggling the bell or they just don’t walk and wait for a bird to come within pouncing range.

You can keep your cat however you want but I wouldn’t be sure they aren’t killing any birds, or noninvasive mammals or reptiles.

Do you let your cat roam free? How many birds is letting your cat outside worth? cats are responsible for the majority of bird deaths in the united states.

100%. All cats eat birds and are a danger to wildlife. They should never be let outside to roam freely.

I hate it when people say shit like “tibbles wouldnt hurt a fly” all cats have natural (very effective) hunting instincts, unless they have some disability, it will probably kill if let outside.

In australia feral cats are causing native animals to go extinct.

For me I felt like the meds never really did much, I started this year and gradually increased the dose. Now I realise how effective they are when I forget to take them.

I did put an asterisk there to be clear. As well china has had a history of not marketing it’s products, like ai, as the future of everything. So by putting to and to together I am assuming that china will probably continue to do the same in the future.

Yep buckykat already backed me up. I was saying that in support of china not against. I agree I think chinese technology is cool.