I think no win no fee is commonplace in the EU.
I think no win no fee is commonplace in the EU.
I think if you’re at the point of poweruser where you’re deciding an init system, you probably should just try them out in VMs. It doesn’t have to take loads of time. Install an OS, try writing some basic services, try doing some basic config for your use-case.
For the vast majority of users, they’ll never have this problem, because they’ll just use whatever init system comes with their OS. I know some distros give init freedom, but most are locked in to one or another init. The fact that you have this problem suggests that either you’re using the wrong distro and should switch to one that chooses for you (or just pick based on one-line descriptions), or it’d be worth your time to spend a day or two poking around with the init systems under consideration in VMs.


Normally no because music distracts me, but sometimes I want to feel a bit more chilled out so I put my entire music library on shuffle and just skip songs I don’t want to listen to. So ends up with all sorts of genres.
You can just try them out in a VM if you’re interested. Systemd can become quite a deep rabbit hole, but most of the others are quite simple and best learnt by doing.


They talk a bit about their hosting infra here: https://web.archive.org/web/20240105093951/https://annas-blog.org/how-to-run-a-shadow-library.html
Interesting read.


I mean, even if it predates modern image AI generation, we’ve had photo manip for a lot longer. Someone could’ve just edited it the old fashioned way. I did some pretty convincing photoshops back in the day.
Better software availability/support than BSDs. Refuse to use proprietary software. Plus, there’s a lot of software I use that isn’t available on Windows or macOS. I’ve tried to dual boot Windows for gaming before and I just couldn’t install most of my usual software on Windows.


There’s a lot of people in the world. If they offer international shipping, I’m sure whatever company you’re thinking of has a sufficient customer base.


preparation for systemd compatibility
To be clear, they’re not switching to systemd; they’re just reportedly (I can’t find primary sources on this, only secondary) working on compatibility with programs that expect systemd to be there.
So what are you suggesting is in question then? The licences sold for games will differ from game to game; if one of then were legally unsound, that wouldn’t automatically make all of them legally unsound, and obviously that’s local to the legal system in which that finding was made. That selling licences to play games is categorically unlawful? I think that’s not a particularly plausible outcome, and is unlikely to propagate beyond the given jurisdiction the finding happens in if such a ruling were to happen.
the court system
There’s no “the court system”. There are court systems. You’ve only linked to US case law, which, for instance, doesn’t apply to me. This does just seem to be a legal fetish (in the anthropological sense, not the sexual sense). A court ruling something or other doesn’t even have worldwide legal implications, let alone worldwide epistemological implications.
As for what counts as piracy (a separate matter to the rabbit hole we’ve gone down), something being a legal term does not mean that the definition of the word matches 1:1 with its legal description. I’m sure we can both think of examples of murder which is not criminalised as murder by a given government, for example. Words are defined by their use, and people use piracy to refer to a method of obtainment.
That’s an insane litmus test of objective fact. I’d say a significant amount of court rulings go blatantly against reality lmfao.
You can’t test things in court that aren’t disputed because someone has to dispute it… Who’s gonna dispute that a contract is a contract? Read the text it says when you buy a game. It says what it says. No court can say a document doesn’t say the words it literally explicitly says.
What I’m saying is not in dispute is the fact that you buy licences to play games and that licences can be revoked. Both of those are objective fact. It’s a separate question as to whether or not a given state wants to enact punishment against a former licence holder.
Case law is specific to jurisdiction. I don’t know where you live, and I’ve not said where I live. The way buying and selling most digital copies of games is through buying and selling licences, though some software you do pay for the download itself rather than paying for a licence. That doesn’t require case law; that’s literally just what it is, like how if I sign a contract I don’t need case law to demonstrate that what I’ve signed is a contract, it just is. Case law adjudicates matters of law which are in dispute, not figuring out whether a spade is a spade.
In the first example, it is not fair use, because you don’t buy digital copies of games—you buy a licence to play the game. My Minecraft licence would have been revoked when I didn’t create a Microsoft account. Game companies can impose whatever conditions on a game licence they like (so long as the condition is not otherwise illegal).
That’s great though, because it makes cleaning the floor fun. You get to drive a remote controlled car instead of just mopping or whatever.
It definitely is, and I’ve done it several times.
One example is Minecraft, which I legit bought but no longer legitimately own, because when Microsoft took over they forced people to make Microsoft accounts and no longer allow Mojang accounts to be used to authenticate. Because I didn’t make a Microsoft account, I no longer own the game, so now I play a pirated copy because I can no longer legitimately play it.
Another example is some games made by studios that went bust and there’s no longer any legit distributor of the game, so the only copy you can download is a pirated copy.
It’s still piracy if it circumvents the intended method of distribution and validation that you own a licence.
Same. It removes the ability to have plausible deniability of “oh I just forgot to tag it”—no, if you tagged it “non-AI” and it was actually vibe-coded, you clearly deliberately and consciously lied.


It’s not as simple as just wiping out the global south and working class—the global north ruling class is only able to better survive climate change because of the labour of the global south and the working class. When climate change leads to a collapse in population and labour in the global south, it will seriously impact the people living in their air conditioned bunkers. The nature of being a parasite means you need a host to leech off of, and that’s us. They can’t live without us.
And I don’t believe climate change is going to literally eliminate every single person among these demographics. Some people in soon-to-be-uninhabitable countries will be able to leave and seek climate asylum elsewhere. There’s also permanent human life in every continent except Antarctica; there will still be some small communities clinging on in parts of the world largely departed, because humans can adapt to such a wide range of climates. There’s going to be a huge societal collapse and restructuring of society, but not extinction.
It is completely unrealistic to expect humans not to be greedy, or to subscribe to left leaning philosophies of human love, human rights, the right to a home or distribution of wealth. In the end we all are monkeys, more now than ever, given how the far right has become so mainstream. It is simply what people want.
“Human nature” is not transhistorical or actual nature. Our material interests change based on the mode of production we live in. We live according to the logic of capitalism because we live within capitalism. Climate change will lead to at least a fundamental change in capitalism, if not its collapse, which will also change humans themselves and our behaviours. Capitalism atomises us so that the economic subject is the individual, but in another mode of production such as communism, the economic base of society would be different such that the economic subject is not the individual. Humans aren’t inherently greedy, nor are they inherently altruistic.
I’m just confused as some comments seem to suggest it’s not possible. There are already idle daemons like swayidle, so you just need to have an idle daemon execute a program that plays an animation and exits when it receives any input? I don’t know of any such programs, but I don’t see how it’d be impossible.
Like all of this ranges from unenforceable to spuriously enforceable (eg for rule 1, you can guess whether something has AI vibes—with vibe code it might be easier if the AI has just hallucinated a function or something). Seems more for the purpose of making a point than anything, or perhaps relying on others respecting your policy, but other projects with much more lenient no-AI policies still have people flagrantly breaking them.