johnnyjayjay

The new one is definitely too expensive for me. I have a phone that I'm not really happy with, but I'm keeping it for as long as possible. After that, I'm probably going to look for a used fairphone. I don't see myself going with another completely unrepairable device.

"Not ours! Not ours!"

AGCAB

Thanks for the explanation, but that's not where my confusion is. What is the context? Why is this posted in mildlyinfuriating? This is just some person saying stuff™

Again... what?

Time for some ranch !!!

Doesn't every game engine... well... package a game engine in its games? Isn't that the whole damn point

RE: Copyleft

The idea of copyleft is that you give anyone the freedom to do anything with your work, with one essential restriction: they do the same for their changes, derivative works etc. Technically attribution doesn't have to be part of a copyleft licence, but all copyleft licences I know have a requirement to preserve copyright info.

And yes, it is popular in software (GPL, MPL, EPL), but for other types of works there is CC BY-SA 4.0 (Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike). If you want to copyleft books, images, videos, other forms of text... this is the way to go, IMO.

Some additional remarks, just to clarify:

• Copyleft is not "giving up all copyright" - copyleft essentially "plays" the copyright system in a way that makes sure nobody is restricting access to or usage of one's work. Using the rules of copyright against copyright, if you will.
• In some jurisdictions, there is no such thing as "giving up all copyright" or "dedicating something to the public domain". Best you can do, generally, is giving users all the same/relevant rights.
• Most Creative Commons licences are not copyleft, only the ones with a ShareAlike (SA) clause. Some CC licences are also nonfree, meaning they don't give you all the freedoms to do what you want with the work. The 2 possible nonfree clauses in CC licences are ND (no derivative works) and NC (no commercial use). NC can also be used together with a SA clause, making CC BY-SA (free) and CC BY-NC-SA (nonfree) the two CC copyleft licences.

The Wizard Book is a classic that basically "builds" programming as a concept.

(it is very technical though. So not sure it's something you're looking for)

This has existed for a while and can be used by anyone: https://github.com/ggerganov/kbd-audio

Needed something to print the occasional document for bureaucracy stuff, and I also got a Brother printer a while ago. Used, laser (very important for good value imo), 100 bucks. An older model, black-and-white but with wifi support. Didn't need to register my license, create a cloud account or whatever other shit companies come up with these days, I could just turn it on and it worked.

From my experience, printer support on Linux is often better than on Windows because all the drivers are included in the kernel and you don't have to go driver hunting on obscure websites.

Yeah. I really like the idea of the ACL, but I wouldn't use it for anything serious right now because it hasn't undergone proper legal review and its enforceability itself is rather questionable. The author said he was going to work on getting that done this year, we'll see what happens.

To clarify, I also don't think the problem I've mentioned can be fixed with licenses alone and I still support FOSS in general. The fact that there's organisations like the SFC and FSF is a bonus, of course.