Not sure if its better, did both and i havent noticed much difference. Forgejo runs codeberg though and is maintained by them. Also has CI with forgejo actions.
My brother in christ, unix was all rights reserved. There was a non-compete agreement prohibiting at&t from selling their OS, hence why it was more or less given to universities. Later, the BSD's did a theseus ship, and at&t still tried to claim ownership through legal methods. For them, the license symbolizes this independence from at&t, which is why it doesnt lay claims on user protection.
Look, im not even going to respond the first part. I love the bsd's as well, from a technical standpoint. From a licensing standpoint, not so much (i see the value in a short license, though).
Im not concerned by what these companies use or do not use. Im concerned about protecting my, and other 'common good' software with a license that strictly prohibits user exploatation. The GPL does this perfectly.
Yes, but this comes with restrictions on distribution of your binary/code/artifacts.
I see the value in these restrictions, but i also see why these libraries are avoided in commercial settings. These terms often come as a suprise from my understanding.
The EUPL solves this by only making claims of the actual modifications to the EUPL licensed components, not any third party user code.
This license (EUPL) was designed with cooperarion as the primary motive, and this is very valuable in my opinion.
I believe the reason we see so much permissive code is because of said suprises with the GPL's, it defeats the utility of the license itself. I say this as an avid GPL lover, but i have also seen projects like libopencm3, which desperately needs EUPL.
On the other hand we have projects like Linux and VESC, where we absolutely positively need to kill user-exploatation dead in its tracks, mostly since it is an end-user product. The GPL serves its purpose perfectly here.
Also, you might note that the MPL is a valid choice here, but it does not offer the same protection in the case of third party extension of the licensed code, since it is file-based, in essence.
Ive actually spent a good amount of time looking into licenses, would love to hear more of your thoughts.
This is somewhat concerning, as im a big fan of working for free, as long as it benefits the users. I have also been looking at the EUPL as a happy middleground (it permits static linking, while any changes to the acual code is copyleft). Copyleft is important, and needs to be talked about.
Absolutely this. It almost seems like a controversial opinion sometimes, but microdependencies is a code smell imo. This could largely be improved by providing a more extended standard lib, at the cost of innovation and velocity maybe. I found this interesting: https://blessed.rs/crates
People like you should be in leadership positions. The landscape rewards quick solutions, and quick solutions are rarely good solutions. "Whatever works" might still be a bad solution, just look at electron and that entire ecosystem.
Interesting. Im curious, what are some key areas of math that you think is the most interesting/useful for software engineering (that you would personally recommend learning)?
I will likely have some spare time in the following months and i currently plan to spend it on deepening my senses related to linear algebra and analysis.
I think you are misguided. Given your level of experience, you are not in a position to spew hot takes on software architecture.
There is something else underneath this. Did you try to use linux or something?
General advice when it comes to software is to just start. There are always different paths, depending on what type of programmer you are. My opiniom: choose simple, not easy.
Can never seem to understand this reasoning.
Musk seems to largely have solved the censorship problem on twitter, which could be regarded as a vital piece of modern dempcracy (along with the rest of the internet, which mostly suffer from said censorship).
While at it he weeded out some traitors, who actively sabotaged during this period. Im well aware that corporate takeovers arent something "good", but this one actually seems to make free speech a first class value.
This censorship is imposed by advertisers, which is somehow celebrated. Were talking disney, coca cola, whatever... These all want to control what you can or can not hear, and people are celebrating it?
The proper response to advertisers trying to co trol democracy is absolutely "go fuck yourself", this should be the norm.
What is this shit? What are you implying?