Matrix isn't super private though. It's halfway there, but compared to something like XMPP, it falls short due to the fact that any instance a user federates with gets a gigantic copy of all of their metadata, and the server operator can do whatever they want with it. So all you would have to do is spin up a new host, message a target user and get them to respond, and you're done.
I have LCD displays that are old enough to vote with absolutely zero burn in sitting in my house right now, and a 1 year old OLED that has noticeable burn in, with several friends who also have ~1 year old OLED screens (including phones, monitors, etc) that have extreme burn in.
Anyone who tells you that its an outdated idea is doing free marketing.
The posters are rendered in a different order for some reason. In one, the combine posters are on top of the normal ones, and in the other, the normal ones are on top of the combine ones.
The combine ones should be on top as they are oppressing anything that could be seen as good, happy, or relaxing for the citizens.
Once you get a devops pipeline set up, you do all versions at the same time and have the compiler farm handle it. No reason the native versions shouldn't be receiving updates at the same time when its become rather easy to integrate multiple targets at the same time.
Look closer. The posters on the wall are the same on both, but they are rendered in a different order. One is back to front, and the other is front to back.
Does FUTO's license allow me to maintain my own fork under a different name to offer to fellow users, that is no longer under control of FUTO? I'm not selling (commercializing) it. If not, it is source-available.
The whole point of forkability is NOT for unfettered commercialization, it is a user protection. I as a user should be able to take any piece of software and modify it in any way I see fit, and then be able to contribute that back.
If you think that the OSI's definition has anything to do with commercialization (other than explicitly saying that commercializing source code is not prohibited), you have completely misunderstood what open source is about, full stop.
There's nothing wrong per se with what FUTO is doing. They have the right to determine how people can use their code. What is wrong is trying to use the term "open source" which has a very clear meaning to try and win marketing brownie points among its user base when it does not actually follow that definition. It is misleading at best.
Basically: don't misuse the open source moniker for source-available projects.
So the open source community has a very clearly defined definition of "open" - open does not mean that you can just read the source code. Just reading helps with some trustworthiness, but in order to be afforded all of the protections and benefits of the word "open", they require some form of ability to fork the code, and to be able to do useful things with that fork. No fork = not open. There are a ton of good reasons for this that I won't dig into here but you can certainly find by looking up the free software foundation or the open source initiative.
There are many analogue ways to dampen sound that work purely off of the shape and material properties of the plugs. Loop earbuds are basically the width of human speech soundwaves and not much else, so it lets you hear people while cutting down on the background noise.
The Crazy Bus Title Scree theme