Incredible how Adafruit-sided this discussion is, having seen ptorrone serially creating alt accounts fediverse to harrass people who thought that his behavior was bad [1], going as far as to harrass people on their Etsy stores [2]. I do not expect anything he says to be truthful at all, after having seen how much abuse he spews out.
i asked if the person was going to "dox" me if i purchased a sticker that was in my cart already. there are multiple people making accounts using my handle, so i'm now on a server where there is some due process before fake reports or others pretending to be me.
> i asked if the person was going to "dox" me if i purchased a sticker that was in my cart already.
That implies you asked this of some random Etsy seller you happened to be interested in purchasing a sticker from, due to general privacy concerns. However, as I understand it, you instead tracked down the Etsy store of someone who had criticized and blocked you on social media, specifically to send them further unwanted messages related to your previous conversation about "doxxing" another user. Is this correct?
> there are multiple people making accounts using my handle, so i'm now on a server where there is some due process before fake reports or others pretending to be me.
Nick cited [1] specific since-suspended fediverse accounts linked to you: @ptorrone@fosstodon.org, @ptorrone@toot.community, @ptorrone@cyberplace.social, @ptorrone.bsky.social, @ptorrone@mastodon.nu. Are you denying involvement with those specific alt accounts, or just vaguely suggesting there might be other impersonators out there?
> However, as I understand it, you instead tracked down the Etsy store of someone who had criticized and blocked you on social media, specifically to send them further unwanted messages related to your previous conversation about "doxxing" another user.
I have zero knowledge of the drama beyond reading the posts here, but if this is true then that clearly falls into the harassment arena.
wow, I recommend people read the linked thread, it basically completely exonerates the "employee who made a hate site" with receipts. I came into this thinking adafruit was in the right, but wow
That's not strictly correct, it's rather that the current encoder does no inter-frame compression. Patches (and the frame system in general) does give tools to do some inter-frame compression (not as many as in video, but still quite expressive), just nobody stepped up to implement compression using them for animations yet.
Don't ever mention PD 1.0, it's a cursed standard that was never actually used and that nobody should ever use. USB PD started with PD 2.0, and we shall never speak of the stillborn child that is 1.0
Sun is continuously running a very nice distillation cycle the size of the world that makes fairly clean water just fall out of the sky. It's only a question of where does it fall, and how much. If you want it even cleaner, wait a couple centuries for it to filter down underground, and get it from there - besides maybe a bit high mineral contents, that can easily be removed, it's essentially free, clean water. The only question is how much it's replenished in the area you're taking it from.
There's plenty of areas where there's more rainfall, than there is outflow/evaporation, with water continuously replenishing deep groundwater. "Saving water" in such areas is of little concern besides the basic, economic one of well maintenance - each one can only pull so much, and more usage means more wells, and more upkeep.
Youtube has been long normalizing videos standard feed, switching to a -14 LUFS target in 2019. But LUFS is a global target, and is meant to allow higher peaks and troughs over the whole video, and the normalization does happen on a global level - if you exceed it by 3dB, then the whole video gets it's volume lowered by 3dB, no matter if the part is quiet or not.
The stable volume thing is meant to essentially level out all of the peaks and troughs, and IIRC it's actually computed server-side, I think yt-dlp can download stable volume streams if asked to.
Companies that build themselves on selling open source software put themselves in the position where anyone else can copy them and compete with them on price, and price alone. This is clearly the disadvantage of open source. It brings plenty of advantages, which is why people do it - but you can't have only the advantages and no disadvantages of open source.
Open sourcing your product is a risky investment, and as with all risky investments, it might pay out, or it might not.
As I said before, I believe that using permissive licences is a bad idea. I have seen multiple projects choosing a permissive licence as a way to compete against an already established copyleft project, just because it's easier to get adopted by companies. I find it unfair but also a bit stupid: by using a permissive licence, they allow anyone to compete with them with a proprietary fork.
Still, there is an antitrust question (that is slightly orthogonal): if TooBigTech can offer a similar product at a loss (e.g. for free) until they capture the market, then that's a problem. And they can only do it because they are too big, and that is an antitrust issue IMO.
Hey, you now have a specific cost to point to when arguing for/against solutions that have this problem. "each deployment will cost us at least 12 specialist hours per year just replacing the certificates" is a non-negligible cost that even the least tech-minded people will understand, and it can be a good lever for requiring the support.
It's because S3 api is quite a fair bit worse than what they offer. They define their guarantees for storage products way more clearly than other clouds, and for blob storage, from my understanding, their model is better than S3.
[1]: https://cyberplace.social/@GossiTheDog/115605021402124429 [2]: https://chaos.social/@gsuberland/115599931317645220