No humor in Lemmy, please.

OK, so is Redhat breaking any license? Do you really think a company like Redhat would open itself to thousands of lawsuits like that. The CEO already explained that this is totally legal and covered by GPL. They are in fact distributing the source to the people receiving the product. This is exactly what GPL says. They are not forced to open the source code to people who aren’t getting the distributed software.

What is your complaint then? They are not breaking any law and they are following the GPL license.

I was using the webframework/language as examples because you said this wasn’t a matter of law but a matter of principle. So why does the principle apply to Redhat but not the million other products that totally depend on FOSS on their core?

So many projects do in fact distribute the FOSS, but they use more permissive licenses like MIT, Apache or LGPL. BUT you’re saying the law is not relevant, what matters is the principle. So why don’t everyone release their code if they depend on FOSS on their core products? Because they aren’t breaking the Apache or MIT licenses? Well, that’s great! Redhar isn’t breaking the GPL license either. Why must Redhat follow whatever subjective principles you have?

— “hey there’s this company creating a commercial product around FOSS. They aren’t breaking any license.”

— “Nice, as long as the licenses aren’t compromised”

— “It’s Redhat”

— “Those mofos! How dare they!”

Well, the re-builders would be breaking the law now that the source code isn’t available for non-paying customers. They weren’t breaking the law before.

So, do you expect every company to release the source code of their products just because they used a FOSS web framework or a FOSS programming language like Python? Or by the same logic, for companies to release the source code of their products if their developers use Linux in their development machines? Or if they use Linux to deploy their applications in the cloud? That’s such an unreasonable position.

1. they are not breaking any law. This is totally allowed. You can use FOSS to create a commercial product.

2. they are major contributors to the Linux space. And they’ll keep contributing.

3. It’s their effort, they created a business around it, and it cycles back to push Linux forward.

4. this isn’t even going to affect average users. This is going to take money from companies that probably have the money to pay. For other companies, there are other distributions available.

— “we don’t like people ripping off our work without any added value”

— “Here, let me push this to your staging environment, totally breaking your quality process”

— “No”

— “Well, what the hell do you want broo?”

I don’t think they have ever hidden the fact this is about money. I don’t like the fact this is about money, but the fact that others were cloning and selling their efforts for a cheaper price is awful.

The only security threat would be the site itself. How do they know other users have the same password?

Options:

• They have your password in plain text in their DB. CHEFF KISS

• They aren’t using salts.

• They are using the same salt for everyone.

All of them concerning.

People creating functions as objects inside of other functions. A few days ago saw a person create a function with two object functions inside, then passed one of the functions as an argument to the other function. Then returned the second function.

It’s hard to find such a mess in other languages. Yeha, functions as objects are cool. Closures are also cool… But why abuse that shit?

Ah ok, server side rendering with no JS. I mean, server-side rendering is good. But a front with no JS? Idk, the page would feel pretty outdated. I wonder if there modern front-ends with zero js.

Python without type hints is torture. I always need to have the fucking docs opened for anything, and if the docs are bad you’re screwed, get ready to read the source code. Like fucking hell man, just let me autocomplete this shit…

Well, it’s not like you have any option. Browsers only run Javascript, right?

My problem with it is that it gives people too much freedom. They can write the code in very, VERY ugly ways… And they do. It’s a language that let’s you write a mess pretty easily.

That’s really my only complaint. The ugliness happens mainly in:

• callback hell. For some reason some people still do callback hell in 2023.

• functions as objects. This is pretty neat actually, one of the best things in Javascript, but some people just abuse the hell out of it.

Come on, Javascript is pretty nasty. Trying to read that shit always gives me brain tumors. Why do they need to wrap every fucking thing in a function inside a function inside a function that is passed as a parameter to a function inside another function?

Like, bro, you know people are meant to understand what you just wrote?

It just gives too much freedom and people forget they need to write code that is easy to read for people who aren’t totally familiar with the code base.

They even bring that shit into typescript. Like they are already using a language that is meant to fix that shit and they are like, nope, let me create 5 nested functions just because.

Just create an alias that filters loop devices. I mean, if this is your only problem with snap, you can fix it in a second. But I’m betting you have other problems with it.

But if you code like a moron the code should still behave as expected. People who code like this deserve a special place in hell, next to languages that behave like that.

I guess this is beating a dead horse but you can have pointers to pointers for 2D arrays.

The first pointer tells you which coulm you’re on. The second pointer tells you which is the first object of each column. That way you can iterate the columns without loosing a reference to the current column you’re standing on.

In C# it is different.

In C if I give you a pointer to a memory address, you can totally overwrite what is in that memory address, even write a new struct in there. So you’re getting a “real” writable memory address.

In languages like Java or C# you aren’t given a reference to the memory address but a reference to the object. You can only write to the object using it’s own interface (methods) but you can’t say “I’m going to totally overwrite this memory address with a new object”.

If you receive an object in a parameter, let’s say a “Person person” object and you do something like “person = new Person();” you didn’t really overwrite the memory address. The original person reference that was passed in the parameter is still intact. You can only modify it with something like “person.setName(…)”.

So, with real pointers you can do more stuff, but higher level languages don’t want you to do that because it breaks some of their principles for what “good programming” is.

I use Ubuntu. I think it’s funny how Arch users immediately assume they know more about Linux than me because of my distro choice. My hobby is learning about Linux and I can do that perfectly from my Ubuntu machine.

I’ve used Arch in the past, and let me tell you, nothing crazy is going on in there.

Yes, Ubuntu sucks because they are forcing Snaps on people while snaps are slow as hell. Thankfully they haven’t fully shoved snaps down our throats. If they don’t make snaps faster before shoving them down my throat, I’ll just distro hop. Probably to Debian. I love Debian.

In how many ways can you package a python?

Just tie a knot with it and throw it in a bucket.

The whole attitude just ruined it for me. He went full “get ready to hear this 2h long story about my times and how awful current generations are. And no, you’re not allowed to go to the bathroom while I talk” grandpa style.

I think sometimes people just want others to go straight to the point. I don’t want to hear the personal stories of this guy, just rambling about his past and his skills.

Maybe he could say the premise and a conclusion. Then explain why he reached that conclusion. But no, he chose to torture you with personal anecdotes to get to a point he could have summarized in a few words.