the syntax is more powerful than markdown, the whole idea of with blocks and the ability to have more complex layouts is great
dannym
joined 1 year ago
I love it; it's been my replacement for LaTeX ever since I've hears about it on hacker news
Doesn't match my experience. The worst thing about it is ping, but download is mostly always around 100-200.
I mean fair enough, some files are in /run/current-system/sw/
well nix still uses the same structure, the only difference is that files are symlinked to files in subfolders of the /nix/store folder.
For example you may find that /etc/hosts is just a symlink to /nix/store/69420aaabbbcccdddfffggghhhiii420-hosts
Agreed, but it kinda already is... Ever gone to a library?
First time I'm hearing about Bookwyrm actually, that's pretty cool.
Let's remember, fellas, that big tech is not a disease that needs to be eradicated. Let us not forget that Google is a legitimate corporation, not merely a group of professional stalkers. And let's be clear: obviously you are the crazy ones for worrying about this, naturally...
Pardon my jest; I was merely echoing the absurdities often heard.
Maybe just maybe it's time we stop with this garbage and actually stop using their services. Nothing will change if we keep using their services.
The most direct and effective strategy to inspire reform in their practices is to stop using of their platforms. Each time we use a service from Google or any similar big tech entity, we inadvertently endorse their methods.
YOU hold the power to change them by using FOSS alternatives instead.
I keep telling people that, but for some, what amount to essentially a simulacra really can pass off as human and no matter how much you try to convince them they won't listen
MIT is a terrible license that only got popular because of the popularity of the anti-open source movement in the last decade.
one could write books about what's wrong with the MIT license.
It could even theoretically be argued that MIT has in some ways allowed big tech companies to proliferate, by effectively allowing them to take open-source code, modify it, and then close it off in their proprietary software. What does this mean? It means that the work of countless dedicated open-source developers can be co-opted by companies that have done almost none of the work, reaping several billions of dollars, while the developers who actually did the work make no money. It's like opening your doors wide only to have someone come in, take your stuff, and sell it back to you.
In contrast, in licenses like the GPL, there's a requirement that if you use GPL-licensed code and modify it, your new code also has to be open-source under the GPL.