I originally went with kbin over Lemmy because the kbin webapp looked and functioned (for me) so much better. But now Memmy has gotten pretty good and close to Apollo so I’ve moved there. For me it’s all about ease of interaction/function.
Lemmy has some bonus points which at the time when I signed up (I joined Beehaw around the same time) that Lemmy does (or didn't) have.
Blocking domains, blocking instances (coming soon), better UI (subjectively), user styles to add extra features, each community has a "normal topics in a forum" and a "Twitter-lite" area for different post types, I believe kbin has better integration/federation with Mastodon (which I also use) compared to lemmy, along with others I'm probably forgetting. (Edit: Forgot one lol, on kbin we can see upvotes and downvotes, as well as (on a topic by topic basis) you can see who upvoted and downvoted things, which I get some people wont like, and some will like, but we also have that on kbin, and can see those stats across instances of kbin & lemmy).
I don't follow your end of the development so Lemmy may have some of those in the pipeline, or may already have some added, but at least a month ago it was a bonus on this end. The lack of an API right now does suck since it limits the app thing, but they will have an API, several of the apps devs have already said kbin will be included when time comes, and kbin mobile is honestly real good regardless so it works out.
NewPipe works by fetching the required data from the official API (e.g. PeerTube) of the service you're using. If the official API is restricted (e.g. YouTube) for our purposes, or is proprietary, the app parses the website or uses an internal API instead. This means that you don't need an account on any service to use NewPipe.
So NewPipe doesn't use yt API and it never accepted its terms, so NewPipe is safe (from my understanding)
Yep in a technical sense they are except they could get sued to hell idk how anonymous the newpipe devs kepp them selves but if they are not I’d say they don’t stand a chance to win a lawsuit against google .
None of this is AI-specific. Youtube wants you to label your videos if you use "altered or synthetic content" that could mislead people about real people or events. 99% of what Corridor Crew puts out would probably need to be labeled, for example, and they mostly use traditional digital effects.
This development aligns with Microsoft’s ongoing initiative to streamline its software offerings and concentrate on more sophisticated applications.
Gross corpospeak. Translated as “We never invested in this because we want you to buy the paid version. Now that the paid version has completely eclipsed the free version we will be deprecating it”
They were never giving it away. They included wordpad with your purchase of windows. They no longer do. I don’t think anyone is saying that windows is not “within their rights”, they’re saying that this degrades the product we already pay for. That is worth complaining about, even if our ultimate recourse primarily ends up being to find an OS that better serves our needs.
Honestly though I’m struggling to understand why you’d think that’s about Microsoft’s rights to begin with??
The specific complaint was “gross corpospeak”. Let’s go ahead and use your explanation of the situation instead of mine, as it is indeed more accurate: how would you disseminate this change to your customers in a way that’s not “gross corpospeak”?
I can’t speak for the original commented, but I’m personally quite tired of the thin veneer that’s slapped into these statements. I would prefer a company just be honest and talk about the profit incentives. They want people using the free version to please pay for the expensive one.
For my experience, I still retain the general irritation at product quality going down regardless of how they word it. But now I’m also annoyed that MS isn’t being straightforward about it.
But if it’s not being developed (that’s my assumption as I haven’t touched WordPad in many, many years) and not many people are using it (again, I’m assuming based on my own personal experiences and those in the workplace), what’s wrong with removing a legacy system?
People complain all the time about Microsoft retaining legacy systems, often seemingly detrimentally, so here it is, an opportunity to remove a legacy system, but now it’s bad?
I get that not everyone has Word. But Word isn’t as paywalled as it once was. There’s the web version of Word, that’s free to use with a free Microsoft account. There’s Google Docs, also free with a gmail account. And there’s of course OpenOffice and LibreOffice, obviously free. So users have options for word processing that are better than WordPad.
I mean, I think they literally provided the preferred, truthful version of the statement?
“We never invested in this because we want you to buy the paid version. Now that the paid version has completely eclipsed the free version we will be deprecating it”
There are winamp clones on Linux, have been since the 90s, and they work with the Minus sound systems. Nobody will care about the actual Winamp (which doesn’t).
There are dozens of first-person shooters but people love porting Doom to every device. Winamp is memes and nostalgia, I would bet that people would port it just for fun.
Doom gets ported because it has extremely efficient code written in low-level language so it’s easy to port and runs well even on potatoes.
There literally no point to put in all the work to port Winamp to a completely different sound system and to have none of its plugins work, when there are Linux clones that already work, have their own plugin ecosystem, and can use Winamp skins.
If they use a FOSS license there’s a non-zero chance someone will bother in spite of all that, just for fun. But if it’s not FOSS that takes all the fun out of it.
Before y’all get excited, the press release doesn’t actually mention the term “open source” anywhere.
Winamp will open up its code for the player used on Windows, enabling the entire community to participate in its development. This is an invitation to global collaboration, where developers worldwide can contribute their expertise, ideas, and passion to help this iconic software evolve.
This, to me, reads like it’s going to be a “source available” model, perhaps released under some sort of a Contributor License Agreement (CLA). So, best to hold off any celebrations until we see the actual license.
If it was source available under a CLA, would it make sense for them to specify that they will retain control over the “official version” of the software? That would seem to imply they will not have control over unofficial versions, presumably differently-named forks.
Winamp will remain the owner of the software and will decide on the innovations made in the official version," explains Alexandre Saboundjian, CEO of Winamp.
Maybe the old Winamp goes OpenSource, like the old MS DOS. But certainly not the current or last version. Anyway there are several way better FOSS alternatives to Winamp. It’s not a big problem for MS or any other company to release the source of an outdated version which anymore create incommings. In GitHub they still can control Winamp.
I would argue that even having a project as source available is better then closed source and can still be pretty good, look at for example the FreeSpace 2 Source Code Project.
If anybody want to ask a game creator to make a game open source and he refuses, suggesting a source available license might still be a good idea.
But how does source-available benefit anybody? If you get inspiration from the code you can get accused of copyright infringement so you’re better off never looking at it, and since it’s not actually FOSS you don’t get any of the usual benefits.
source available can allow a lot of things including modification of the source code (and in particular adding quality of life improvements and updating the code to run on modern platforms). Some restrictions like not allowing selling or even not allowing competition (for example allowing the game engine to run only the original game , or disallowing the removal of monetization).
If you look at openage (age of empires 2 reimplementation) the game is not playable 25 years after release and that game is considered a classic, we could lose a lot of very good games or software.
Horrible, glad I deleted my Reddit account just as the kerfuffle began. That site is going to hell anyway, hopefully only the techbros stay to make all the learned information toxic and useless.
alternativeto.net
Hot