I recently started doing this as well but not sure if it’s excessive. I’m beginning to think I need to separate out actual data from ephemeral data (e.g. browser cache, etc)
Migrated account from @CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world
I recently started doing this as well but not sure if it’s excessive. I’m beginning to think I need to separate out actual data from ephemeral data (e.g. browser cache, etc)
This is essentially what Mozilla is doing but providing a legal framework for all open source projects.
As an open source developer, my initial reaction is that this isn’t good. You’re just shifting the problem. Your code remains open source so if you have a python or JavaScript library that doesn’t require compiling, you can’t use this.
Not only that, but FOSS requires you to provide build instructions for your binaries. Someone can clone your repository and run it through CI/CD and have a binary.
I’m willing to be proven wrong here.
I’ve seen only one method work well: highly restrictive FOSS licenses like AGPL that essentially make it impossible for a company like Amazon from profiting off your code without a separate agreement.
You could add a non-commercial clause to your open source license. I can’t find the one that I used to use back in the day but essentially the goal is to augment whatever license you use by attaching a preamble that dictates how the software can be used.
Attaching that clause does push the software out of FOSS and into source available since you are restricting who can use the software, which is why I stopped using it.
I feel like matrix isn’t a one-to-one replacement. It’s a good slack replacement.
I haven’t used matrix enough to know for sure but does it have the discord equivalent of servers?
Mozilla’s new TOU only covers pre built Firefox executables, not the source code.
Librewolf and Waterfox are good forks that would not be bound to the TOU.
They do not. Your use of the software, with software you “control” (edge cases of cloud compute, etc.) does not require you to grant a license to the software.
I refuted most of these points on this user’s post.
This is absolutely abnormal. No browser should require a license to my own data unless they plan on doing something with it.
No other FOSS includes this language and I would argue that Firefox executable is no longer FOSS. It’s now source available.
I would call them “starter” instances. And I’m in agreement there should be a set of principles that these instances should follow but at the same time telling new users that it’s okay to switch instances. I started in .world but moved due to their increasingly conservative changes.
While I personally would steer new users away from .world, I think it’s more important to tell them it’s okay to switch instances.
Really early on like right after the API fuckfest, there was a large influx of users who picked servers based on whatever. As a result, servers defederated and there was a lot of drama as a result.
Though that said I haven’t heard much about defederating in some time.
I have a delta of about 200mb ± which isn’t a lot all considered but it changes everyday. The only regular thing I do is use the browser. I might need to exclude it from my incrementals and only do those weekly.