danielquinn

danielquinn , 14 hours ago

Could he now sue the people that beat him (or even Sainsbury's)?

danielquinn , 14 hours ago

The minute you automate someone's job, you do necessarily admit that society doesn't need that person's work to get by. The only reason they shouldn't get to put their feet up and take it easy is political. And politically, we have decided instead what happens is they die.

I have been trying for years to put this into words when discussing capitalism & technology, but I've never come across something so succinct. Thank you.

danielquinn , 5 days ago

This line of reasoning is broadly underrated. Sure batteries are a thing, but if a liveable world means regular brown outs, I'm cool with it. The alternative after all is so much worse.

danielquinn , 5 days ago (edited 5 days ago)

Honestly, after having served on a Very Large Project with Mypy everywhere, I can categorically say that I hate it. Types are great, type checking is great, but applying it to a language designed without types in mind is a recipe for pain.

danielquinn , 5 days ago

Very cool trick. I've never been comfortable with how Python package installation is effectively arbitrary code execution. It's also a nice reminder that installing packages into a Docker environment is generally safer than going bare back metal.

danielquinn , 5 days ago

Very slick. It looks like a thin wrapper around some pretty powerful tools, and I'm impressed that they're still useful on such a low-power device.

I wrote an assistant a while back before Whisper was a thing, but now that I see what you've done, I'm going to have to go back and refactor.

danielquinn , 6 days ago

What the fuck is with this immigrant blaming? We're supposed to be better than this.

danielquinn , 6 days ago

I wrote a version of this in Python a few years ago, but it depended on external tools like ffmpeg to work, limiting its portability. The Python requirement was also a major factor for adoption.

If it were ported to Rust, doing the (de)serialisation internally, I believe that it could have far-reaching implications on how we share and consume news:

https://danielquinn.github.io/aletheia/

If you're interested, I presented the Python version at PyCon UK a while back.

danielquinn , 6 days ago (edited 5 days ago)

That's an interesting thought. There's a lot of cases you see where people have stripped a comic's name from the bottom of the image, but that's not really what this project was designed for. Aletheia will guarantee you that the person/company sharing the media is who they say they are, but critically it won't prevent infringement.

The example I give in my talk is that InfoWars could take a BBC news story and say "we made this", but it wouldn't let them modify that story and claim that "the BBC made this". The goal is to be able to re-connect what someone is saying with the reputation of the person saying it, with the hope that we can start delegating our trust to individuals and organisations again.

danielquinn , 7 days ago

This is the path to enshitification.

danielquinn , 8 days ago

Voyager: One Small Step

It's one of my top ten favourites, but it's also a very typical "one off" story.

danielquinn , 8 days ago

Fuck yeah.

danielquinn , 8 days ago

What cowards we are.

danielquinn , 9 days ago

It says it'll hit "overnight", but surely in 2024 we can be more accurate than that?

danielquinn , 9 days ago

Awesome, thanks!

danielquinn , 11 days ago

challenging the place of Zionist leaders in mainstream progressive politics.

We really have to stop conflating Zionism with Judaism. Only the Zionists benefit from it.

danielquinn , 11 days ago

You're probably thinking of Cardassia, which I will also note has a judicial system where the state decides the defendant's guilt in advance of the trial. In such a system, it's typical that the rich & powerful simply aren't prosecuted. So it's the same system as ours, just with fewer steps :-(

danielquinn , 14 days ago

I don't understand. Surely if you've got a limited amount of water in the lake, drawing that water from a shallow well reduces the available water by the same amount as it would from the lake itself?

danielquinn , 14 days ago

"Deeply frightening" can you name even one thing Corbyn said or did that was antisemitic other than be openly antizionist? Given that it's Israel's Zionist regime that's currently committing genocide, I would think Corbyn would have been vindicated by now.

danielquinn , 15 days ago

Has anyone managed to get AM2R working on the Deck? I was thinking of trying it out next.

danielquinn , 15 days ago

Public services aren't meant to be profitable. They're meant to provide a service that serves the community.

danielquinn , 15 days ago

That's a fair point. So long as it's addressed from a position of "is the community being served well" and not "this should be run like a business". Canada Post has a difficult (and expensive) mandate: to service all of the country, no matter how remote, and the knee-jerk reaction to such headlines is often to privatise which would change that mandate to "earn as much profit for investors as possible".

I'm living in the UK these days, with private post, and private water companies. Things have literally been enshitified, with raw sewage flowing down the river Thames, so I'm concerned when I see such headlines.

danielquinn , 15 days ago

Because post is more than just letters, it's parcels too. Canada Post is infrastructure that ties the whole country together, not just the denser, more profitable cities. Imagine if there were only for-profit postal services in the country. What would it cost to send a parcel to 100 Mile House, or Baker Lake, or whole swathes of the country that only speak French? Think of all the things that go out by post, like Carbon tax rebate cheques and voting information. It'd introduce a massive disparity in service and access to basic services, and so we socialise that cost across the country.

There are always ways to improve of course, but you asked specifically about why the system was socialised.

danielquinn , 17 days ago

I read that quote in Londo's accent!

danielquinn , 17 days ago

Can someone cobble together a list of video clips of PP just being an asshole? My family thinks he's this great, clever "everyman", and I think we could do a lot of damage to bike by supercutting all the times he's demonstrated what a slime ball he is.

Of course, if the Liberals and NDP insist on running with their current leadership, they might as well just hand him the keys now.

danielquinn , 18 days ago

That was lovely, thank you!

danielquinn , 19 days ago (edited 19 days ago)

• Kubernetes Cluster
  • pi-left
  • pi-right
  • pi-centre
• Other Servers
  • pi-katamari (file server & database)
  • pi-athens (DHCP, DNS, pi-hole)
  • Alexandria (Synology)
• Desktops
  • Berlin
• Laptops
  • London
  • Brighton
  • Brussels
  • Cambridge
  • Toronto
• Phones
  • Laconia
  • Vulcan
  • Bajor

danielquinn , 21 days ago

Relevant Canadaland Commons episode.

danielquinn , 21 days ago

They also support genocide.

danielquinn , 22 days ago

Snowfl has some pretty good results (note the addition of the keyword complete). But you can do a lot better than Paw Patrol! "Bluey", "The Owl House", "Hilda", and "Kipo and the age of the Wonderbeasts" are all far better choices for kids and your own sanity ;-)

danielquinn , 21 days ago

Heh. We've convinced our kids that Paw Patrol and Cocomelon "don't work on our TV". All I had to do was let her select it a few times and then kill the network connection when she wasn't looking. After that, we marked them as "disliked" in Netflix and now they never appear.

It may not last, but I'm doing what I can :-)

danielquinn , 1 month ago

I rather like the FSFe for general Free software stuff, but you may find nicer-looking stuff if you visit merch store for specific projects, like GNOME, KDE, etc.

danielquinn , 1 month ago (edited 1 month ago)

Not throwing any shade, just some advice for the future: try to always consider the problem in the context of the OSI model. Specifically, "Layer 3" (network) is always a better strategy for routing/blocking than "Layer 5" (application) if you can do it.

Blocking traffic at the application layer means that the traffic has to be routed through (bandwidth consumption) assembled and processed (CPU cost) before a decision can be made. You should always try to limit the stuff that makes it to layer 5 if you're sure you won't want it.

The trouble with layer 3 routing of course is that you don't have application data there. No host name, no HTTP headers, etc., just packets with a few bits of information:

• source IP and port
• destination IP and port
• A few other firewall-specific bits of information like whether this packet is part of an established connection (syn) etc.

In your case though, you already knew what you didn't want: traffic from a particular IP, and you have that at the network layer.

At that point, you know you can block at layer 3, so the next question is how far up the chain can you block it?

Most self-hosters will just have their machines on the open internet, so their personal firewall is all they've got to work with. It's still better than letting the packets all the way through to your application, but you still have to suffer the cost of dropping each packet. Still, it's good enough™ for most.

In your case though, you had setup the added benefit of Cloudflare standing between you and your server, so you could move that decision making step even further away from you, which is pretty great.

danielquinn , 1 month ago

Mozilla's VPN is just reselling Mullvad, so you can support Mozilla and use Mullvad at the same time if you like.

danielquinn , 1 month ago

You might want to consider just Dockerising everything. That way, the underlying OS really doesn't matter to the applications running.

I've got a few Raspberry Pi's running Debian, and on top of that, they're running a kubernetes cluster with K3s. I host a bunch of different services, all in their own containers (effectively their own OS) and I don't have to care. If I want to change the underlying OS, the containers don't know either. It's pretty great.

danielquinn , 1 month ago

You might like Swarmism!

danielquinn , 1 month ago

Revealjs is a pretty great replacement for PowerPoint, but it does require rudimentary HTML skills.

danielquinn , 1 month ago

yt-dlp is pretty much the authoritative solution for this these days.

danielquinn , 1 month ago

What's a PPA?

danielquinn , 1 month ago

Watch the video. The selection of bike infrastructure is done so in a frame of lowest cost with highest benefit, and this is couched in the explanation that there's no one thing to solve everything but rather a series of things that all must be done.

danielquinn , 1 month ago

If you really want an app-like interface, you could make use of Epiphany's "Install as Web App" feature. Just open Epiphany, go to your Lemmy instance, login, and then select "Install as Web App" from the main menu. Like magic, you get a "Lemmy App" that you can bring up like any other app.

This is my experience in GNOME. Presumably though, it'd work with any desktop environment that respects the XDG standards.

danielquinn , 1 month ago

I am very disappointed to hear that the bricks are foam.

danielquinn , 1 month ago

These are fun questions! There's a few other things you have to consider though before you can have some answers.

If the work was done for your employer (non-commercial, academic, or otherwise) you should be sure that your work for that organisation did not include the transfer of ownership of the work you create to said organisation. Most organisations that employ people to write software usually include a stipulation in your contract that anything you create "in the course of your employment" (this is a legal term meaning work you do for your job as well as work you might do related to you job as inspiration/necessity for your job etc) is owned by the employer. If that's the case for you, you can't simply re-license the software, even if it's already publicly viewable. You need to seek the consent of the copyright owner to either (a) transfer the ownership to you, or (b) agree to a new license.

Which brings me to the first thing people tend to forget about copyright: unless otherwise stipulated (like through the inclusion of a LICENSE file) all creative works are copyrighted and cannot be copied, imported, modified, distributed, etc. without the express consent of the copyright holder (usually through a licensing agreement).

So with that in mind, and assuming that you already have the copyright to this code, I'll answer your three questions:

1. Can I just add a license after the fact and it will be valid for all prior work?

This is fun question because it hinges on a silly technicality of software development. If you add a license to your repo today, the license applies to the code as of that point in the commit history. There's no official way to say (through the standard of including a file in the repo) that this license applies retroactively, but if you're the sole copyright holder (see notes on this below) of the work in its current state as well as everything that came before (ie. you didn't get PRs from other people thinking they were committing to a project under a proprietary license) then practically speaking, you can apply a Free license to all the old versions because you're the copyright holder -- you can do whatever you want. The problem is a practical one: without a LICENSE file, it's not clear that this software is Free.

Unless you've got a bunch of other people/teams/organisations working off of forks of your current codebase though, it's really just a thought experiment: no one will care because the latest version is Freely licensed. Someone could conceivably fork your repo from an earlier point in history, but without a LICENSE file in that fork, legally speaking that code is solely your property, so copying it would be illegal unless you made a copy for them with a LICENSE file included.

2. Do I have to make sure the license is included in all branches of the repo, or does this not matter? There are for instance a couple of branches that are used to freeze the state of code at a certain time for reproducibility’s sake (I know this could be solved in a better way, but that’s how it is).

There's a lot of overlap here with #1. Basically your old release branches will be copyrighted by you and not licensed Freely. If it's important to you that these releases also be under your new Free license, then yeah, you're going to have to include a new commit on each release branch with your LICENSE file. Personally though, I wouldn't bother. If anyone is using an old release, they'll get the Free version once they upgrade and that's usually good enough for most people.

3. I have myself reused some of the code in my current work for a commercial entity (internal analysis work, only distributed within the organization). Should this influence the type of license I choose? I am considering a GPL-license, but should I go with (what I believe to be) a more permissive license like MIT because of this?

So much of this centres around the current ownership of all code in the repo. If this were a personal project into which no one but you has ever committed any code and for which there's no existing contract stating that your-employer-not-you owns the code, then the answer is really simple: it's your work, you can do whatever you like.

For example, you can write a program, license it under the AGPL3, and post it on GitLab for all the world to see. Strangers from the other side of the planet can download it, modify it, and run it in their own projects so long as they adhere to the AGPL3 license. So long as you don't accept any merge requests from anyone else, you can also re-license the code (or a portion thereof) to a private company (your employer, a contract gig, whatever). Remember, it's your code, you can do with it as you like, so if you choose to give it to a company to build into their proprietary project, there's no problem.

The problem comes once you accept code from someone else. If I submit a merge request to your project that fixes a bug, I do so under the terms of that project's license. My code is AGPL3 because the project's license is AGPL3. You can't now take my bugfix and copy that into a private project because I didn't grant you that right. This is why re-licensing a Free software project, even from GPL-2 to GPL-3 can be really painful: you have to contact each contributor and acquire the right to change the license.

So, TL;DR: if it's 100% your code, you can make 10 copies, all under different licenses. Do whatever you want. If it's 99% your code, you're bound by the license in affect at the time those other contributions were made.

[Source: I'm a Free software nerd with a penchant for copyright, so much so that I married a copyright lawyer so we talk about this stuff a lot.]

danielquinn , 1 month ago

Interesting. I wonder if this code would fall under the license of the publication then? The blurry line between documentation licenses and software licenses is usually when I stop and go ask my wife :-)

danielquinn , 1 month ago

That's fair, though if you're looking for something more legally ironclad, I'm not sure I would want to depend on a declaration like that. But you're right, as the sole copyright holder, you can choose to apply your licence any way you like, so long as it's clear (for some value of clear) to the recipient that the software, what the license is.

danielquinn , 1 month ago (edited 1 month ago)

That's a good question. I believe there is official text for "GPL-3 or later" that you can use, which should (I just asked the wife to be sure) then let you re-license the project to GPL-4 later. This is probably possible because the "or later" portion of the license text includes consent by contributors for the future change.