I helped do the easy scenario at large scale in a fortune 50 several years ago after the vendor thought they could get greedy on the support contract renewal. Only required small changes to a few files and packages.
Arcka
joined 2 years ago
Copyright does not give the holder control over every "use", especially something as vague as "using it to undermine their skillset".
Copyright gives the rights holder a limited monopoly on three activities: to make and sell copies of their works, to create derivative works, and to perform or display their works publicly.
Not all uses involve making a copy, derivative, or performance.
It's poor for the second, since the result is a gas (hard to store long term). We would want it as a solid or liquid product, which this doesn't do.
Why wouldn't the device include or feed a compressor to liquidize the CO2? It takes just a little over 5 atm of pressure which is trivial.
I think a likely scenario would be for name changes, such as taking your partner's surname after marriage.
I was also thinking this was close:
'Hate will never prevail.' Local residents confront group displaying swastika flags on I-75 overpass
Agreed (mostly).
Just because something isn't illegal, that doesn't make it morally right. The inverse also applies.
Even though the First Amendment prohibits government suppression of speech, it doesn't mean that the expression is immune to consequences from society including non-governmental suppression.
I think the "no arrests were made" observation was meant in relation to your last point, not the first at all.
For most people, using https and dns over https (DoH) is probably all that's needed.
Isn't that because Dan hasn't open-sourced his project yet
Wrong: https://github.com/pixelfed/pixelfed/blob/dev/LICENSE
and doesn't let anybody else contribute?
Hmm, while there have been 158 contributors, a very small percent were from the other developers: https://github.com/pixelfed/pixelfed/graphs/contributors
This information is pretty easy to look up.
Right? So much of this seems like people not able to tell if actions are good or bad independent of who takes the action. There's no way their team could ever do anything bad, and anything done by the other team is automatically bad.
God forbid you try to reinforce a rare good behavior from someone who's also done a lot of horrendous things.
Wrong. These people can't handwave away their portion of responsibility for the current situation. They chose to lend their skills to a company with a long, well-documented track record of actions harmful to society. If you can get hired by one of the FAANG companies you could also get hired by nearly any company.
Giffords group lies or misleads about guns?