It’s an answer on if one is sure if they are not just a fancy autocomplete.

More directly; we can’t be sure if we are not some autocomplete program in a fancy computer but since we’re having an experience then we are conscious programs.

Is there a reason to think all the other companies couldn’t start doing it to?

The only thing one can be 100% certain of is that one is having an experience. If we were a fancy autocomplete then we’d know we had it 😉

A TV used to be clearly different from a computer monitor. Hopefully monitors resist this for longer but no reason to think this can’t happen there.

Rather have a TV from 1999. Hope LG goes under.

Talking about “IP” as if it were a single thing confuses any debate. Copyright is not a patent, which is not a trademark - they do different things.

Software patents actually should be deleted. It is impractical to avoid accidentally infringing as there are multiple ways to describe the same system using totally different technical descriptions. Copyright for software was enough.

Tax BigTech to fund a universal basic income (UBI)

With the minimal amount of work added the combined work can now have added restrictions. They’re pushover licenses.

Devs are free to choose whatever license they want but in the pathfinding problem of interacting with others then “protecting the source” is the wrong target node. Copyleft is a tool to help people.

The intent of copyleft is to ensure freedoms for the recipients of derivatives of your works. In software that means the users of forks. Copyleft restricts you to the same license (or a compatible one) to prevent you adding more restrictions. ““More permissive”” software licenses can be redistributed with the same license but often it’s a more restrictive license (e.g. MIT -> proprietary).

Open source is just that

“Open” is an unspecific, a range of openness from not redistributable to (libre) free software.

own forever

Ownership implies control - being able to maintain/repair, modify or even resell.

To be in control of software you need access to it’s source code, and have the right to share changes with others.

Given it’s unrepresentative voting system I think how much is enough to be a democracy. T hot take for people that see democracy. Two parties to choose from is just one more than a clear dictatorship. If neither actually represents you then yeah it’s not healthy .

Who the hell is the manufacture to decide if a remote feature no longer functions? (I’m guessing people don’t rent these devices from Amazon - it’s your property).

I don’t need your concent, it’s in your best interests - Amazon

Why 30 years, why not 10?

I hope no software is involved.

software update is available, heart will be restarting now

Although Plex is running on your server it isn’t there to do what you want… unless Plex’s real owner permits it.

That’s how proprietary software works.

“Stargate” is already taken for another science fiction. You’ll have to pick another name.

This is not an ad
Enter email to receive emails

I disagree, Mr Website.

It’s not always obvious or easy to make what non-techies will find easy. Changes could unintentionally make the experience worse for long-time users.

I know people don’t want to hear it but can we expect non-techies to meet techies half way by leveling their tech skill tree a bit?

Techy people are a lot more likely to jump through hoops because that knowledge/experience makes it easier for them, they understand it’s worthwhile or because it’s fun. If software can be made easier for non-techy people and there’s no downsides then of course that aught to be done.