dvdkon

The GPL is the only reason they even get that. More enforcement would certainly be good, but it's not like the GPL is worthless without a legal team backing you up.

It's really cool what can be done today with just an MCU that has sufficiently flexible IO. What's the performance like?

I'm not too concerned about my place of residence, since the state already publishes my full address online. But OSM edit history also shows the various places you visit, with timestamps too. I still haven't decided if I want to do something about that or not. It's certainly something new contributors should be aware of.

If you're making a commercial SaaS, that's probably the way to go. For individual users like me, with a coding harness and some extra BYOK tools, OpenRouter is convenient and the few extra percent don't hurt much. I appreciate being able to try out any new model with just an ID swap, same with inference providers when they prices change. I know I wouldn't enjoy managing 5+ accounts, each with their own balance, in 3+ tools, so this is one thing I'm happy to outsource.

From my understanding what's keeping us from this kind of dystopia are restrictions on shrinkwrap agreements, general restrictions on one-sided contracts, and the fact that breach of contract "only" creates civil and not criminal (like copyright) liability.

I don't have any numbers on fan art vs original works floating around the web, but even those original works aren't being monetised via copyright. They would be created even if copyright was abolished or significantly weakened.

> There are murders so why make it illegal.....

The downsides of murder clearly outweigh the upsides. The fact that we're debating here shows that's not the case for copyright.

> ...somebody having the rights to a cartoon mouse in perpetuity isn't actually holding society back is it?

People want to adapt that mouse into their own works, as they have done with stories since stories started being told. They do so even if they know they're breaking the law. That alone should be reason to reconsider copyright.

We all stand on the shoulders of giants, and reusing facets of modern stories isn't somehow less creative than reusing old stories or reusing lived experiences. You can take the general story beats of a popular work, strip out all copyrightable elements, and end up with something wholly derivative. You can also build on a known work and end up with something that's fresh, creative, maybe something that engages readers/watchers/listeners of the base work in a way that nothing fully original could. Take Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality; it clearly reuses another work's characters and setting, but it would be worse off without it.

> You're free to buy or not buy any creative work.

You also don't have to rent/buy a place to live, but I wouldn't want to live a life without a roof over my head or access to creative works of my culture. When you accept that access to media is a necessity (and people today do treat it as such, just try finding someone who doesn't listen to music, watch videos, read books...), you clearly see that having copyright is a decision made by the state that results in wealth transfer from every citizen to authors and publishers.

Those authors/publishers do provide value, so it's not necessarily a bad thing, but as with every market intervention, the specifics need to be carefully considered.

You could establish contracts with publishers outside of copyright, which is how NDAs work today. It's probably a reasonable thing to do anyway, otherwise there's nothing stopping a publisher from telling everyone the plot summary of your newest novel.

As others have pointed out, piracy is already easy for anything remotely popular, yet people still buy books. We could assume that it's not because they fear breaking the law, but because they want to support the author and have an "authentic" copy.

There are also other models than creating a work without any income, then recouping that cost by a state-granted monopoly. You can release preview chapters and then solicit donations from interested readers. You can build on your reputation and then promise to finish the book later for some up-front payment. These might not work for everyone, but they are in wide use today. One could argue that removing options for those authors that depend on copyright today is still a reasonable price to pay for removing all the abuses of copyright.

Most of that art is being created irrespective of copyright, though. Much of it uses exceptions to copyright and some is straight up in violation (most "fan art"/fanfiction). It's either not monetised or monetised through things like Patreon.

I wouldn't say we have more "traditional" art that an author spends time creating with the vision of selling copies for years to come, than we did when copyright terms were shorter.

Theoretical aphorisms can't override the facts of recorded history. If the harsh border control and cultural isolation of the East Bloc ran counter to Marxist principles, then you can complain to the dead leaders of the USSR, but that's about it.

It is strange. I certainly wouldn't think your house, having been isolated from western society over decades by a communist regime and heavily-patrolled borders, would respond to social activism in foreign countries. But maybe there's just some secret house mycelium for sharing progressive ideas that I don't know about.

I don't remember any LGBTQI+ wars here in the Czech Republic, so "blood free" actually seems like a good characterisation. Sometimes the system just works.

See also the Velvet Revolution for a pretty large shift away from totalitarianism without any deaths.

Not always. Consider an SPA that connects via WebSockets and streams in data, adding points to a chart. The JS-less alternative would be refreshing an SVG or even the whole page once a second. The SPA is clearly more efficient here (unless someone screws it up badly).

Sadly complexity is unavoidable for most real-world usecases. Just see how so many people interested in de-Googled phones balk at the prospect of losing access to banking apps. Telling them to go use an OS that doesn't support Bluetooth isn't going to work, but hopefully you wouldn't say that means they should give up all hope of security.

Abstraction has served us well in managing complexity before. I wouldn't abandon it out of misplaced idealism.

> pay bureaucrats with your consumer's money

Once the consumer has paid, it's your money now. The incentive is clear, less packaging means more money you keep. That only big producers will actually see the per-ton payments as significant instead of just having to pay absurd registration fees is a separate issue.

The right thing to do is not to sweep him under a rug because "there's only a few such gypsies", but to look at what he's doing and say "yes, this is what we want to ban". Being a in minority is not a shield from consequences, but it shouldn't be a reason for dismissal either.

In the case of the 3-EUR-tariff, nobody has come out and said "we want to make small electronics production/repair untenable", so I'm optimistically assuming its effects are not intentional.

What does "positive market incentives" mean for you? My immediate thought is various subsidies, but given how those usually end up (easy money for companies spending more on lawyers than actual productive work), I'd much rather just have a tax.

Congratulations, you've redefined democracy to mean something very different to the dictionary and colloquial definitions. That's not very useful though, unless your goal is to confuse people.

Without the EU you wouldn't have a single set of annoying overly-bureaucratic bloc-wide regulation for trade between member states, you'd have a bunch of bilateral agreements between individual countries. You might not be paying a new tax to the EU, but instead you'd pay much more for your postal service to file customs paperwork based on declarations you'd have to write. And I'd guess countries would still want you to have a local representative for a bunch of things, not to mention compliance with tens of slightly-different safety standards (think CE).

Maybe it wouldn't be that much worse, but certainly not better than what we have today.

I'm tired of being told I don't matter because I'm in a minority. You'd never dare imply a tax making gypsy folk singing unviable is fine because it's a "miniscule minority" of all music played, so why do it for electronics repair?

> I was unaware German Impressum applied to a natural person who is not running a business. If that is true, then I agree that is unfair.

Then it seems we agree. I thougt you were commenting about both personal and business sites, given the original context being community forums.

Yes, I have a business registration and have to include personal details in a bunch of places. But if do things as a natural person, those requirements don't apply (and it's even simpler for people without a business registration).

I share your frustration, but won't restricting the EU only cause barriers to trade to grow?

A surprising amount needs to be unified in order to have fully free trade, and I see unwillingness to lose existing national structures as a big problem in today's EU.

> Its just good manners so that your customers/suppliers can know who they are dealing with.

That's the (widespread) issue, treating personal websites and online communities like businesses. Some are, but that's not something to encourage or assume.

I live in the Czech Republic, where you can buy a SIM card anonymously and build a website without identifying yourself. I don't see a good reason for other countries to not give their citizens the same freedom, and am vehemently against reducing freedom just because "other countries do it".

I mostly deal with the possibility of bricking a device by not caring too much :) That said, I usually start by reverse-engineering the software at one of the ends, so I don't blindly "fuzz" the device. There's still some risk, but not that much.

It's a shame Framework don't offer support for component-level repairs, but sadly neither do other laptop manufacturers, if you don't count leaked resources. They could certainly do better, but I wouldn't see it as a reason to switch to e.g. ThinkPads.

Maybe it's just familiarity, but I think it would look a lot more comprehensible with some punctuation. Just because a syntax is formally unambiguous doesn't mean it looks that way to humans.

    func (b: Box[T]).Map[U: any](f: func(T) -> U) -> Box[U]

I use Sway and happily manage my terminal windows using its tabs and splits. I can mix other "graphical" apps with the terminals or move them to another screen, all with the same keybindings. I agree, though, that I wouldn't want to replace my Sidebery vertical tabs with this setup, but I ultimately don't see why equivalent functionality couldn't be implemented inside the window manager in some alternate universe.

There are sadly hardly any WMs now with tabs, so having them support tree style tabs as well doesn't look too realistic.