I'm not quite sure what you mean? Louis calls it open-source during the entire "This is open source, but it is NOT free!" segment. But what he describes as open-source is not open-source, but source-available.
Open source licenses must allow free redistribution. FTL allows license suspension and termination at any time, without notice, for any or no reason.
Open source licenses must allow source code distribution. FTL allows restrictions to access the code at any time, without notice, for any or no reason.
Open source licenses must allow modifications. FTL allows modifications only for non-commercial use, or maybe not even that. FTL dodges the word modifications here, no clue.
Open source licenses must explicitly allow distribution of software built from modified source code. FTL forbids distribution of software built from modified source code for commercial use.
Open source licenses must not discriminate against persons/groups and fields of endeavor. FTL allows license suspension and termination at any time, without notice, for any or no reason.
The FTL enables the following practices:
Copyright holders can change the license terms.
Copyright holders can re-license everything.
Copyright holders can target specific groups and individuals with discriminatory license terms.
Copyright holders can close source everything.
Copyright holders can forbid specific groups and individuals from using their work.
Open source licenses must allow free redistribution. FTL allows license suspension and termination at any time, without notice, for any or no reason.
Open source licenses must allow source code distribution. FTL allows restrictions to access the code at any time, without notice, for any or no reason.
Open source licenses must allow modifications. FTL allows modifications only for non-commercial use, or maybe not even that. FTL dodges the word modifications here, no clue.
Open source licenses must explicitly allow distribution of software built from modified source code. FTL forbids distribution of software built from modified source code for commercial use.
Open source licenses must not discriminate against persons/groups and fields of endeavor. FTL allows license suspension and termination at any time, without notice, for any or no reason.
The FTL enables the following practices:
Copyright holders can change the license terms.
Copyright holders can re-license everything.
Copyright holders can target specific groups and individuals with discriminatory license terms.
Copyright holders can close source everything.
Copyright holders can forbid specific groups and individuals from using their work.
My main gripe here is that the video sells a source-available software with severe usage restrictions as open-source. These restrictions may sound reasonable to people outside of the open-source world, especially to people who use similar wording in their own terms of service, but nobody would touch your software with a ten foot pole with a software license like that.
It's the ISO enter key with stabilizer judging by that image.
But I found an interesting reference that suggests that everything here works as intended.
Image 1: 122-key IBM Model M
This layout matches mine with the following exceptions:
Additional keys from the 122-key variant.
I've got a two unit high numpad plus key instead of two distinct keys.
My layout is German QWERTZ.
Image 2: 122-key IBM Model M internal assembly
If you look at the placement of stabilizer inserts, then this matches my IBM Model M. Same exceptions apply. I couldn't determine whether the 122-key IBM Model M enter key also uses a stabilizer metal bar, but it's suspiciously similar to my layout nonetheless.
Still costs $2.00 + $35.20 shipping + $7.44 import sales tax = $44.64, though. I was too impatient when I bought my IBM Model M. I even saw one get sold for $35.
Good to know! What I also didn't know is that the spring and stabilizer placement depends on the keyboard layout. My enter, numpad plus, and numpad enter key have what I now assume are metal stabilizer bars. So I guess everything was alright after all, or do these still need stabilizer inserts? I think it's weird that I can't press the upper half of the enter key, though.
I don't want to create an account on the dbzer0 instance to create an account on the dbzer0 wiki to edit the wiki. It's nice that we can contact the mods/admins to make edits to the wiki, but that's a kludge more than anything else.
I'll always appreciate Lisp for the most powerful REPL in existence of programming languages by a long shot. Name me one programming language that empowers developers to troubleshoot and fix runtime errors with high availability like Lisp does:
Meh, who cares. Let's continue to run.
Here's a REPL with the app state at the time of the runtime error. Happy debugging!
Fix the bug in production inside of the REPL while everything continues to chug along.
Save the changes to disk and check it into version control.
The REPL in Lisp is so powerful that there's an entirely different approach to developing apps in Lisp. You can, and some do, code everything inside of the REPL. When they're done, they save the file to disk.
This sounds like a great excuse to launch an archive with a bunch of proxies that automatically captures new New York Times articles and tracks changes over an exponential amount of time. Preferably with a built-in algorithm that diffs the articles.
I spent 7 hours to debug why doubles in Java classes brick my class file parser only to discover the following small print in the specification after I read the corresponding OpenJDK source code: In retrospect, making 8-byte constants take two constant pool entries was a poor choice. Yeah no shit. I chose to write a custom user stylesheet for Oracle specifications to enlarge notes since they're obviously critical to the implementation of JVMs. I guess the technical writers at Oracle didn't want to offend the developers who wrote the JVM originally at the expense of developers who write JVMs today.
Google Chrome has lots of oddball issues. I've got a personal gripe with Chrome animations. Chrome animates elements on page load occasionally. Animations can and do de-sync in that weird state for some ungodly reason. What I love about this particular bug is that the bug ceases to exist when you use the built-in animation debugger. So Chrome got an animation debugger, but that animation debugger changes the state of animations to an extent that it becomes useless to troubleshoot animations in some situations. Mind blowing.
Edit: Lemmy doesn't let me post the code snippet for some reason. But it boils down to a temporary class that nullifies animations. When Chrome fires the page load event, the code removes the temporary class.
Fedora @ lukas @lemmy.haigner.me Posts 5Comments 251Joined 2 yr. ago
Nah, Louis explains that the app is open-source, but describes open-source as source-available.