@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

Excrubulent

@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

Excrubulent,
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

I wouldn’t be surprised if the ban was a pretext and the sub was just something admins found objectionable for their own reasons. Like as long as mods remove material and users when an issue is brought to their attention then the sub should be fine.

The fact they don’t know why it happened is telling that they weren’t given a real chance to correct the issue. Just centralised social media things I guess.

Excrubulent,
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

Being a gooner is a significantly more worthwhile investment of your limited time on this earth than being a reddit admin imho.

Excrubulent,
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

I believe the admins do get paid. It’s the mods that were fucked over here that don’t get paid. I was really talking about your overall contribution to humanity.

Excrubulent,
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

The last call from the Thresher was reportedly garbled communications with the only audible phrase, “exceeding test depth”, which was followed soon after by the sound of an implosion.

What is the Legal copyright on a Lemmy Post?

Most instances don’t have a specific copyright in their ToS, which is basically how copyright is handled on corporate social media (Meta/X/Reddit owns license rights to whatever you post on their platform when you click “Agree”). I’ve noticed some people including Copyright notices in posts (mostly to prevent AI use). Is...

Excrubulent,
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

Copyright is more than that, like who is allowed to make commercial use of a given work. Just because something is written down in a public forum doesn’t give everyone free rein to do whatever they want with it under copyright.

Excrubulent,
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

Uh, copyright always works that way. You’re not supposed to make copies of movies most of the time, but people do, and it is virtually unenforceable as long as they take basic precautions. One of the only times it is reliably enforceable is when a business tries to make money off of your work and you can sue them.

Excrubulent,
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

Sure, but I would say that there’s a reasonability test there. Like, I could have a posted note somewhere on the internet that says, “by allowing my computer to download your content you grant me full license to use your intellectual property for any purpose in perpetuity throughout the universe,” but that doesn’t make it binding on anyone. Federation means other servers pull the data, so you don’t have control over it, so you can’t be considered to agree to a random server’s terms.

The same thing happens when you download a website. The website always allows others to download its content, but that confers no license no matter what anyone else says.

“License free” doesn’t mean “free license”, it means the opposite. No explicit permission is granted.

Excrubulent, (edited )
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

I think this is a very fine distinction that would have to be settled in court and could go either way. I can only say what I think it should do. And to be honest I think copyright is garbage, but for it be consistent I don’t think that this difference should matter.

I think an important distinction for me with federation though is that it’s not just a push, you have to subscribe, so it’s a two way street. It would be similar to an RSS feed, and I’m not aware of that having any particular implications for copyright. There is certainly no explicit acknowledgement of terms baked into either protocol, so I think the only reasonable conclusion should be that it doesn’t impact copyright either way. That remains unlicensed and subject to the normal rules, which presuppose that permission is not granted.

Excrubulent,
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

but he’s one of the most powerful men in the world, so that’s not going to happen.

Excrubulent, (edited )
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

Yeah, but you’d need the algorithm. It could be a hash of some kind, and if you don’t know what kind of algorithm they’re using you can’t replicate it.

EDIT: Oh, I see what you’re saying. You mean you could simply rewrite the original card value back over it forever. That’s actually quite clever, and it would work even in case the card was completely encrypted.

Actually that means this is trivial to beat I think.

Excrubulent,
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

The problem with that is that if the machines don’t talk to one another then there’s no way to make that system work across machines. I guess if each machine enforced it then you would eventually run out of machines that work for your hacked card.

Excrubulent, (edited )
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

Yup, I’ve realised that’s what people are saying. That’s not an easy one to guard against I’m afraid.

Excrubulent,
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

No worries I’ve been in this thread a bunch and only just got it.

Excrubulent,
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

What speeches? What stated aims? You need to make claims if you want me to address them.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • megavids
  • kavyap
  • DreamBathrooms
  • thenastyranch
  • magazineikmin
  • osvaldo12
  • everett
  • Youngstown
  • mdbf
  • slotface
  • rosin
  • GTA5RPClips
  • ngwrru68w68
  • cisconetworking
  • JUstTest
  • InstantRegret
  • cubers
  • khanakhh
  • ethstaker
  • tacticalgear
  • Durango
  • normalnudes
  • tester
  • modclub
  • provamag3
  • Leos
  • anitta
  • lostlight
  • All magazines