not only do these people want to do fascism, they want you to rawdog it

Edit: having read this back to myself, I realise that the alternative of non-rawdogged fascism would be much more unlikely

If going from scratch, trying to get support from an acquiring bank to verify authorisation and settlement integration as a community project would be “interesting”. Things like PCI compliance, 3DS accreditation etc. also. Pretty much need to piggyback off an existing solution.

Yeah definitely. I’m sure some people in co-tech in the UK were working on something like this in a more generalised way a while back. They were running sessions for people on this for a while. Working with experienced orgs on this would be key.

Ideally each country would have a system which generates all the basic legal paperwork and a sound (if basic and intended for extension) constitution which encodes essential compliance requirements. Getting such a system verified may be easier said than done, however, especially depending on how co-op friendly the local regulatory environment happens to be.

I’d say if anything it’s hard to stop people from doing so. It’d be trivial to set up an ad-hoc exchange (e.g. I’ll PayPal you money for tokens) for instance or simply resell items purchased with the tokens in a fiat market.

Thinking more strategically, I think the aim would ultimately to get things like this provided through our co-opy marketplace.

The question then becomes when does exchange into national fiat currencies become an issue: legally of course there’s money laundering concerns. I’m hoping that the continual regular and cheap issuing of the tokens would generate a somewhat inflationary environment (which is compensated merely through dealing with everything instantly and electronically with an exchange mechanism) which would head off speculation at least.

Then maybe there is some idea that there should be an exchange to fiat currencies which is also organised as a co-op, which could allow some governance to be put in place around it and then defederate from instances which allow ad-hoc fiat exchange (again to put in a speed bump for money laundering and criminal liability).

Honestly just proprietary driver, steam and proton works really well for me on stock Fedora workstation.

Ok here’s the pitch: instances generate currency for each of their users on a time registered basis or some other easily verifiable metric. Each instance’s currency is different and they automatically generate exchange rates with each other instance’s currency. People buy and sell items through it using only currencies generated by the federated platform.

Also all instances have to be co-ops or they get de-federated. Maybe the license even specifies this.

???

Socialism

Down rating employees purely because they took medical leave is a fully scummy thing to do.

Then again I guess enabling genocide, conducting psychological research on unwitting users and calling his early adopters dumb fucks might have been early warning signs.

Would-be regex compiler writers wince as they realise they can’t just implement a FSA 😢

There should be a “saving thirty minutes in reading documentation by spending two days debugging a GPT generated method”

Yeah I used to use Ubuntu as a Linux desktop a few years ago. I just came back to install Fedora on my desktop and the whole process was super easy. Even for gaming, Nvidia drivers, Steam with proton, etc. all set up with zero command line interaction, troubleshooting or even looking up guides or anything. It was intuitive and works.

Literally the hardest part was I couldn’t find my USB stick and ended up improvising with an old SD card as installation media.

The compatibility for gaming on Linux today is generally really good. The whole experience is really polished.

Some LLMs have specific jailbreaks which including in the document may cause them to act strangely in a way that is specific to the LLM. But it’s unlikely to be robust over time as they get patched/changed/etc.

Strictly speaking these all do something similar-ish at face value but actually quite different in terms of mechanism and target. I think the unpopularity of a lot of these licensing structures is also down to lack of legal verification in a lot of cases.

The illegality possibility does warrant careful consideration, but I suspect in many cases regimes which would oppose this kind of license would be making the use and enforcement of software fairly selective in any case. If it is made illegal, it’s made illegal by the respective government, not the software author or license writer.

A question is then raised as to what degree the implied open source requirement that open source should be leveraged by e.g. Nazis actually benefits developers and users. Or whether it is in effect a kind of appeasement as no doubt use which contradicts those values (and hence promotes freedom) is illegal already. Those uses which are orthogonal to that aim may be selectively targeted for arbitrary reasons such as the identity of the user.

Strictly speaking I think such provisions would be unenforceable in those circumstances anyway so doesn’t the effect kind of cancel out? Don’t get me wrong I get where you’re coming from but why would we imagine such a license has an effect in nations that are already hostile to those ideas and probably have broken judicial systems anyway?

It is ok to question the benefits of open source provisions. They are written by humans and are fallible.

Yep, it makes sense when you consider the real nature of management and why it actually exists.

A rich man starts a company. He hires 12 people under him. He’s working a bit harder than he’d hoped, he’s constantly fielding questions and such but all is well. He needs to hire two more people. This is too many for him to manage directly, so he appoints two people to manage the other twelve as two teams of 6. All is well again.

They expand up to 30 people and suddenly they find the two managers are too stretched again! So another manager has to be introduced. When the company is over about 150 people, we even need multiple layers of management to keep this whole thing afloat as suddenly there are too many managers reporting to the founder or to the managers.

Yet at no point does the person who owns the company agree to give up any real control. If someone sets a budget he doesn’t like, he gives that control of the budget to someone else. Everyone in that hierarchy is acting on behalf of the owners under this arrangement.

The managers are just sat there with the mandate to make employees do more work under ever-increasing resource constraints, in the name of profit maximisation.

The management hierarchy functions as little more than a way of getting the owner’s instructions down to the employees by people who can interpret them as such, and to feed issues back to whatever level has the ability to deal with them (or declare them not an issue, as is often the case).

I’ve been using this for a while. It’s good, lots better than postman’s annoying attempts to force you into their cloud nonsense.

well the publishing associations should be catching wind of this and it’s already going through court so I guess we’ll find out.

But if I had to guess I’d say the bourgeois court system which is loaded with Trump’s picks right at the top is actually not going to let the billionaire donor go to jail

Oh yeah the hosted DeepSeek has that

oh interesting, but they did seed some. Distributors! Zuck go straight to yar-har jail

we can make it more cursed: sudo $(curl http://sonic.exe.info/sonic.sh) | sh