natsume_shokogami

joined 1 year ago
[–] natsume_shokogami@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

I think even ChatGPT would eb called non-free for them though

[–] natsume_shokogami@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Though I know what this is for, but I am against blocking VPNs and Tor since it prevent privacy-conscious people like me and other people such as dissents or other having high risks of like harassment online.

The instances being affected the most are those with open registration, and don't block registration from temporary email providers, and have don't have like automatic filter or using Fediverse softwares not providing such.

Though given Lemmy development may not support blocking registration by emails or filtering keywords or filtering federation of very new accounts/new account having no profile, manual approvement registration or applying bots filtering repeating spams may be enough without blocking VPNs or Tor I think

[–] natsume_shokogami@lemmy.world 28 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

If you want some APIs implemented, make a feature request; you understand what you want

[–] natsume_shokogami@lemmy.world 36 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's not Linux or SteamOS, but both Epic and CD Projekt don't support their store client apps and launchers on Linux sadly, such we have to use unofficial ones such as Heroic Game Launcher

[–] natsume_shokogami@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

The problem is that I think despite the "war" on the surface between copyright holders and LLM/diffusion model corporations, they are actually cooperating with each other to ensure that they would still be able to exploit their creators and artists by replacing them with the models or underpay or otherwise mistreat them, while taking away any chance of competitors or normal people to access to the large language/stable diffusion models or public domain and free/open culture works.

Oh, it is not even "secretly" anymore since many of the same copyright holders actually announced they would replace the creators with LLMs/stable diffusion models, and soon maybe even some of the corporations filing the lawsuits since they would realize they can have benefits from those people than pretending to listening to the mass.

[–] natsume_shokogami@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

How is Sam Altman related to Reddit?

[–] natsume_shokogami@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

At least Discourse's softwares are open source, and it as well as many other companies having plans joining Fediverse don't have a long history of EEE, supporting or letting extremists exist on their platforms and rampage,... like Meta. Meta has a long history of bad deeds so they would get any benefit of doubt.

[–] natsume_shokogami@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There are, actually. Since Misskey's culture are different from Mastodon's, they have been implementing more features than Mastodon from the start, and Misskey's APIs are different from Mastodon's so there will be many weird quirks when accessing Mastodon (even weirder if it's a Mastodon fork such as Glitch-soc, Hometown, Fedibird,... since they use older Mastodon versions as base) instances from Misskey instances (though Firefish devs are improving this by implementing Mastodon APIs and several Mastodon features). Also note that Misskey caters more Japanese users more than Mastodon, people who aren't familiar with Japanese culture may also even Misskey userbase and features odd and different as well

[–] natsume_shokogami@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

However it's currently difficult for games made for Godot to port to consoles (XBox, PlayStation, Nintendo Switch,... not those non-Switch "gaming handhelds" since they are all just Windows/Linux handheld PCs) while keeping Godot open source since the SDKs, APIs, porting kits of these consoles are proprietary and you have to sign in NDAs. If most of your games' revenues are from consoles, you don't have much choice currently.

It seems like what I've read from GPLv2 and GPLv3 as well as RH's EULAs, contrary to some people here, Red Hat technically didn't violate the GPL, but they are already not following the spirits of GPL and free software/open source (People expect free/open source software as in they can easily find the source publicly accessible in GitHub, GitLab, CodeBerg, or whatever Git, Subversion,... repos of your company or organization). And I think they don't believe in free marketing either, many other companies are aware that people are pirating their softwares, or compiling the software themselves (if it's open source) and give them as if it's from them for free; especially when you're dominating a market segment, it can make people exposed and relying on your softwares, so that anyone will mandate to use your softwares because it's "industry standards".

view more: next ›