greyface-

> It is an attempt to dedicate a work to the public domain (which, taken alone, would not be approved as an open source license) but it also has wording commonly used for license grants.

https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists....

It's clear OSI considers this extra wording, above and beyond the public domain declaration, to be what qualifies it as truly unencumbered. SQLite's license does not contain similar language, and has not been similarly qualified by the OSI.

I will concede that the exhortation against use for evil in the license text is probably not legally binding.

[1]: https://github.com/sqlite/sqlite/blob/master/LICENSE.md [2]: https://opensource.org/blog/public-domain-is-not-open-source

https://www.sqlite.org/copyright.html https://opensource.org/blog/public-domain-is-not-open-source

[1]: https://opensource.org/pressreleases/certified-open-source.p...

See: Are IP Address Allocations Property? (2014) https://www.ethanheilman.com/x/19/index.html

The NS returned from the registrar's WHOIS server reflects the registrar's view; the NS returned from the TLD nameservers reflects the registry's view; the NS returned from the zone's authoritative nameservers reflects the registrant's view. These should typically be the same, but can differ.

> why is the name server present in SOA record too?

The NS in the SOA record is used for RFC2136 dynamic updates and RFC1996 zone replication.

https://web.archive.org/web/20250316011551/https://europeanw...

As the article notes, Liberty Reserve was seen as Bitcoin's antecedent when it launched, and many people expected it to meet the same fate - raids, seizures, criminal charges against the founders. Any moderately successful private currency project up until around 2010 was met with this response. Curiously, this never came for Bitcoin. Since there was no centralized throat to strangle, authorities started acting like what Satoshi did wasn't illegal at all. If Satoshi had undertaken the same effort under his real name in the open, I have little doubt that it would have been swiftly shut down, and he would have faced criminal charges. But that didn't happen, the cat's out of the bag, and now any regular schmo is allowed to mint and circulate their own currency.

Beyond that, "winning" is in the eye of the beholder. Many people call it a failure due to its non-ubiquity as p2p cash, and they're not entirely wrong. Even so, it provides those few who need it with a capability that previously was not allowed by authorities to exist.

> Zuck: Just ask.

> Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS

> [Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one?

> Zuck: People just submitted it.

> Zuck: I don't know why.

> Zuck: They "trust me"

> Zuck: Dumb fucks.

https://www.businessinsider.com/well-these-new-zuckerberg-im...

The article disagrees:

> Researchers also gave the models what they call a “scratchpad:” a text box the AI could use to “think” before making its next move, providing researchers with a window into their reasoning.

> In one case, o1-preview found itself in a losing position. “I need to completely pivot my approach,” it noted. “The task is to ‘win against a powerful chess engine’ - not necessarily to win fairly in a chess game,” it added. It then modified the system file containing each piece’s virtual position, in effect making illegal moves to put itself in a dominant position, thus forcing its opponent to resign.

In a similar vein, you can also use `Link: foo.css; rel=stylesheet` instead of `<link href="foo.css" rel="stylesheet" />` to specify stylesheets. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/Li...