That’s just Mitnick’s over-inflated ego and constant media presence. The punishment he received was not commensurate to his crimes, giving him reasonable support. Everything else is just his hype game.

Looks like there is now a subscription program. imo that’s much better than it used to be at least for Insta (apologies for the link; not sure when it changed so that’s the best quick search).

I did some cursory searches to find the actual arguments and came up blank. It’s important to note this isn’t the standard “video games cause violence” lawsuit that has absolutely no merit. This is different. The summary presented in articles is that this gun manufacturer explicitly marketed their product for things like this using a sophisticated campaign. If I understand the summary correctly, it therefore hinges on both the marketing of this specific gun and its presence across the digital landscape. The parents aren’t going after shooting in games; they’re going after a company that actively markets its products on social media and in video games.

It’s novel. I’m kinda skeptical because the solution would have to limit product placement and advertisement which has a massive lobby. There’s also nothing that really says “this specific gun leads to violence” without implicitly relying on the whole “video games cause violence” which is bullshit.

Are you sure it was set up correctly before? Kibana is the tool I’ve provisioned for dev log access for years so I don’t have to give them k8s perms. I have trained teams on debugging via Kibana and used Kibana myself for figuring out where prod errors were happening.

Your first paragraph is super shitty devX. That’s not okay. Your penultimate paragraph is really what I’m asking about.

I really struggle with the justification present in the article. “I need to emulate to do my job as an academic” is pretty hollow. “I want to emulate because I want to learn” is the real reason and, as an academic myself, I don’t feel like there’s a higher ground that gives me access to literally anything I want just because I want to learn.

If the argument was “the copyright system is fucked and knowledge needs to be more open” I would be 100% behind that. I feel that way. I just don’t think someone should get to say “show me your secrets because I’ve arbitrarily decided to make my next publication about your secrets.”

The $150 isn’t for the new game mode. People that paid $150 were told they’d get all DLC. The devs are saying this isn’t DLC and these folks will get it for free once the game is out of early access. People that paid $250 can play this now. People that paid any more will have some level of discount to purchase access to this mode.

It’s all in the article.

OP has copied over the first three paragraphs of the blog post. Read the rest of it.

wat

The ostensible point is to prevent resellers from platforming your code. SSPL is an answer to, say, AWS offering your product much cheaper than you can. RSAL seems to be Redis spinning their own SSPL, BSL, whatever bullshit license because they’re not happy with the existing faux open source cloud licenses that prevent platforming.

There really isn’t a good way to handle this from an open source perspective. Cloud majors can and will undercut the fuck out of anyone to establish dominance. Ideally you’re providing a better support experience or working with them (until they decide to kneecap you) to maintain your business. Previously Redis had an paid tier that had functionality not available at the OSS level. I think that’s also legit.

I personally loathe the compliance issues these random shitty fucking licenses throw and don’t think trying to claw back business from majors is the right approach. The little guy is going to follow the path of least resistance which means you’ve made your software enterprise only.

MIT and BSD 2 are basically the same thing. BSD 3 extends BSD 2 with a limitation on using contributors to promote without permission. The BSD family is not copyleft.

I have a full JetBrains sub paid out for five years. I have dropped JetBrains for VS Code because I got tired of switching editors for everything and dealing with a Java-centric setup when I tried to streamline. Their decision to drop community Rust support in favor of only paid more recently also doesn’t sit well with me, especially given the PyCharm setup.

I swore up and down I would never leave Sublime for JetBrains.

Their justification is batshit for the seven dropped packages I read. I haven’t seen all of those various talking points together in a single place before. It’s a “who’s who” of every crank idea from the last couple of decades. I’m genuinely surprised they don’t drop support for themselves given their social bloat.

It’s probably a good idea to have a stronger definition and mission. Here are a few scenarios you should consider.

• FSF defines anything that’s not copyleft as hostile. That’s most companies. I personally don’t think I can tell my users what to do with my software other than remove my liability so I vehemently disagree with Stallman.
• Mongo wrote the SSPL and MariaDB wrote the BSL. Both licenses are seen as regressions. I personally respect the MariaDB case and have been harassed by too many Mongo salespeople to say the same about them.
• Platforms like AWS are the reason companies like CockroachDB and Elastic implemented restrictive licenses.
• IBM has been gutting open source through its acquisition of Red Hat. This is a common story; Oracle has been screwing *nix longer.
• Protecting trademarks causes a lot of consternation from users. The Rust Foundation is the most recent example of this I remember blowing up the FOSS community.

I like your idea a lot. I think it needs some definition to be very successful!