My mother once threatened to evict me (was still living with them) because I asked her to back up her important files for me to carry them over to the new office computer I had set up for her.
She flat out refused to even attempt it or answer any of my investigative questions. This woman had been using windows computers for work for over 20 years at this point, but the thought of opening an explorer window apparently terrified her so much we got into an actual shouting match over it.
Not even the lemmy instance you're on needs a license to your content, and it is stored there and displayed for the world to see. Why is that? Because storing and displaying your posts is the very thing you want it to do. That is the service it is providing for you, and you declare that you want it to do that by clicking "send". They would need a license if they wanted to do anything else with your stuff, which doesn't directly have to do with displaying your posts in the fediverse.
The browser is supposed to take my requests and inputs, carry them to the server that I'm talking to and bring back the answer. The mail doesn't need a license to my letters. That only changes if they want to open them and do something I originally had not intended.
But you know who claims a license to your content? Meta. Because you're the product there, not the costumer.
And let's remember that the last thing Mozilla got heat for was the introduction of a method to anonymize bulk user data for sharing & selling purposes, as opposedin addition to the granular, extremely invasive tracking that 99% of websites are doing these days.
Ftfy. It's never going to replace more invasive tracking and just constitutes yet another party collecting my data.
I see a company that needs to make a decent amount of money
Mozilla already makes enough money from passive investment income. They don't need to make any money from Firefox at all (but they do, it's from google). They also don't need to pay their CEO 6 Million a year.
Then how about putting that in the language? "We don't sell your data, except if you're in California, because they consider x, y and z things we might actually do as selling data."
The browser manufacturer doesn't need a license to my inputs to process them and give them to the server it's supposed to give them to. If you type a text in Libre office, does it ask you for a license to the text in order to save it?
Thank you for doing this. I particularly like the GOG part as I usually prefer to buy from them. Most of the Linux gaming advice and news out there is catered to the majority of 100% steam users though.
So, let me get this right, there's been a shit storm about.... A slightly different haircut?? They couldn't even find a boob or butt that looks smaller than before?
It's not mine, it's a quote from the book "A Clash of Kings" and subsequently the Game of Thrones TV show.
Anyway the answer is just what I wrote. Power resides where men believe it resides. In the riddle, it's entirely up to the sellsword which kind of power they value most.
A core principle of modern (western) legal states is that it's preferable to let 10 guilty people walk free before wrongfully punishing one innocent. I'm aware that we often don't manage to live up to that, but it is the ideal.
That's why guilt of the individual (!) has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt, it's why certain evidence may become inadmissible if it's been acquired illegally, it's why suspect's may walk free due to formal errors. We try to make absolutely sure that cutting corners doesn't lead to wrong conclusions, even if it means that we sometimes have to let criminals go unpunished.
Following that same principle, "it's possible that there's a significant majority" isn't enough. Where's the proof that there's not a single inhabitant of Gaza who doesn't support Hamas?
Also, since when is it a crime punishable by lifelong imprisonment or death to be hateful of someone?
And if you and your entire people were held in an open air prison for as long as you could think back, would you not grow hateful of your jailers?
Last but not least: The logic that "there are no innocents [on the other side of the fence]" applied by Hamas towards the Israelis led to October 7th. If it was flawed then, how is it not flawed now?
"In a room sit three great men, a king, a priest, and a rich man with his gold. Between them stands a sellsword, a little man of common birth and no great mind. Each of the great ones bids him slay the other two. 'Do it,' says the king, 'for I am your lawful ruler.' 'Do it,' says the priest, 'for I command you in the names of the gods.' 'Do it,' says the rich man, 'and all this gold shall be yours.' So tell me—who lives and who dies?"
It sadly all comes down to who the police (and somewhere down the line the military) believe is right.
Nothing! I did nothing! Things just happened!