avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • Tuesday January 18, 2022, 8:18 am
  • Proudly celebrating 15+ years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Tuxman [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 95next
Living Room / Re: Wordle: simple web word game
« on: January 17, 2022, 05:58 PM »
Well, there's Letterle as well, pretty much making Wordle obsolete.

Charity is not above the law.

N.A.N.Y. 2022 / Re: NANY 2022: DateAdder
« on: January 10, 2022, 09:09 PM »
Denying someone's right to define what other people are allowed to do with his software by explicitly stating a license and claiming that a developer does not own an application anymore when he decides to publish the source code - which literally contains the word "copyright" - is not a "conversation in good faith". Note that you are not the culprit here.

I will not discuss this in more than one thread. No more source code for you, folks. If you don't want to respect the license, you won't get a chance to disrespect it anymore.

N.A.N.Y. 2022 / Re: NANY 2022: DateAdder
« on: January 10, 2022, 05:39 PM »
As a long-time member of DonationCoder has declared that publishing the source code of an application effectively ends my copyright on that application, I removed all references to the source code from this NANY entry. Future contributions will be closed source as well. I am not interested in having my copyright violated just because I published my software in good faith.

It was intentionally and maliciously designed to break other projects that used the code in those public repositories he had stewardship over.

If you take someone else's code which is under a license that says "no warranty" and you contribute nothing to that code, you have no legal (because of the license) nor moral (because you don't contribute back) right to complain that the person who basically works for you for free stops doing so.

Just because other people decide to use my code, not breaking their code is not my responsibility.

But this guy is an obvious bad actor who intentionally caused harm through his actions.

Being nice is not a requirement for any free software developer, is it?
If you make a lot of money with stuff I wrote in my free time, expect that I won't like you much. And if you don't give me any reason to be nice towards people not liked very much by me, I probably won't be. Why should I?

(Just in case: I'm not the author.)

And this is not his first foray into intentionally harming others. He has a history of making literal bombs and booby traps.

So it's that guy's fault that other people download and embed his stuff? Did he make them?
I guess he did not.

When he released his code using an open source license, it became a public good.

This is a very awful perception of open source and licensing. Thank you for letting me know how you think about the software I posted on DC; that it's not mine anymore because I published the source code. I'll probably make all of my future NANY contributions closed source. Because I am not interested in you voluntarily violating my copyright just because you don't give a fuck about the license which you legally accept by using the code.

Just in case you do care: Most open source licenses explicitly state that the licensed product - usually, source code and/or documentation - is not a public good. I usually use the MIT-0 and/or the CDDL these days. Both basically say that the code is still mine, you are free to modify and distribute it, but if I decide to break it, it's not my problem.

If I wanted my code to be "a public good", I'd put it into the Public Domain. (in Europe, that would still require me to explicitly say so.) But I don't.

That's pretty much the meaning of free software.

No. It is not.

"Free software" means: Take it, modify it, embed it, contribute your changes (if required by the license and/or if you want to be nice).
"Free software" does not mean: Take it, then complain about my changes.

If you want to be the steward of the version you use, fork it. You are free to do so.
If you want someone else to be the steward of the version you use because you're lazy and/or a greedy corporation, that's not someone else's fault.

I have just checked the license of the faker.js software. It is the MIT license. Here's what you can do with it:

  • Modify it.
  • Redistribute it.
  • Use it commercially and/or at home.
  • Embed it in non-free software.

But what you can't do with it:

  • Hold the developer liable for any breakages in your software because of the code you downloaded from him.

If you don't want to allow a developer to - intentionally or unintentionally - break your software in a later update of his code, here are your options:

  • Fork the working version.
  • Pin the working version number.
  • Don't use software licensed under a license that allows this.

There is no reasonable reason why the "victims" did not choose any of these three options. They deliberately agreed that the author can do whatever he wants with his part of "their" software.

He is perfectly within his rights to intentionally destroy his own copies of code.

And they decided to update their copy of his code with a destroyed version (version number "6.6.6" - ha!) without even checking the consequences. Sounds like bad QA (or even no QA at all) on their side to me. Not his fault, is it?

He is not within his rights to destroy public property.

Free software that is not Public Domain is still a property of the author. The MIT license literally contains a copyright!

A person who creates a statue and freely donates it to be displayed in a public park does not have the right to destroy the statue later if he becomes angry that people aren't paying him money for it.

Unless the park owners signed a license contracts that lets the person do that. Which is what happened.

I can see you totally misread my posts. Good night.

Again, he hasn't shown that he reached out to Microsoft before posting this.

A free software developer should not have to ask anyone, certainly not Microsoft, for permission to destroy his own code. That's pretty much the meaning of free software.

GitHub has some mechanisms to prevent "hacks", including 2FA. So you're only allowed to make your own code unusable if you can prove to Microsoft that you're really you? What kind of crude understanding of free software is that?

It has to do with the effect of that code

I can't remember a rule that says that I can't commit code to my libraries that break my libraries.

and I'm sure the complaints from others

So if other people - including large corporations - decide to take my free code that is licensed under a "no warranty" license and my code breaks their applications, Microsoft is allowed to modify my code?

Because if something is checked into a repo that is obviously wrong, it can be construed as a compromise of the account, resulting in the locking of the account.

So Microsoft (I will not say anything about Windows Me here... or should I?) has decided that you must not check in obviously wrong code into your own repositories?

From what I read, he posted malicious code to his repo. Is that correct?

He committed code that did not work as expected into his own repositories containing his own free code.

Why exactly is Microsoft entitled to deny that?

I don’t think that the number of external projects which use your code should be relevant metrics for you to decide about the future of your code.

Anyone here still using GitHub?
Enjoy losing access just because they don't like your commits.

Were they hacked or does their humor just cater me well?


N.A.N.Y. 2022 / Re: Now what's this?
« on: January 07, 2022, 08:55 PM »
So the NANY 2022 Wrap-Up is linked on the website, but it's empty. Nice.

On Windows 11 with the "new" WSL, Acme does not seem to need that anymore.  :)

Possible fix for corporate proxies. Please try and report.

N.A.N.Y. 2022 / Re: NANY 2022: DateAdder
« on: December 30, 2021, 03:58 PM »
Explained above. With a screenshot.

Living Room / Re: Merry Christmas and Happy New Year 2022
« on: December 23, 2021, 06:24 PM »
[ Invalid Attachment ]

N.A.N.Y. 2022 / Re: Now what's this?
« on: December 21, 2021, 01:46 PM »
Use the NANY preset from the dropdown list. Ignore that mouser forgets to change the year every time.

Living Room / Re: Merry Christmas and Happy New Year 2022
« on: December 19, 2021, 10:10 AM »
May Frigga and Odin be with you in the longest night of the year. :)

N.A.N.Y. 2022 / Re: NANY 2022: DateAdder
« on: December 19, 2021, 07:36 AM »
To be honest, I almost forgot.  ;D

N.A.N.Y. 2022 / NANY 2022: DateAdder
« on: December 17, 2021, 05:08 PM »
NANY 2022 Entry Information

Application Name dateadder
Short Description Fulfills the single need of having a platform-independent tool that lets the user add days, weeks or even months to today's (or any other) date and see the resulting date.
Supported OSes In theory, any that run Go (as of today, these are: DragonFly BSD, FreeBSD, Linux, macOS, NetBSD, OpenBSD, Plan 9, Solaris, and Windows).
Download Link Attached.
Version History
  • 2021.12: First public announcement on DonationCoder.
Author me.

I wanted to find out which day is "today in two weeks" without having to click through a monthly calendar. Now I can.

  • Does not support units smaller than a day.
  • Also does not support substracting days, weeks or even months.

Planned Features




Grab the .exe file from the attachment and put it wherever you want. Send me a personal message for non-Windows builds and/or if you need the source code.

Using the Application
You'll need a terminal window. (On Windows, the Windows Terminal is pretty nice.) Then just run any calculation of your choice:

% ./dateadder "today in a week"
% ./dateadder "2021/12/31 plus four days"

Et cetera, et cetera.

Delete the .exe file.

General Software Discussion / Re: Vivaldi - add buttons to panel?
« on: November 23, 2021, 08:23 PM »
Firefox is a waste of space by now. Sad to see it detoriating for a decade.

Indeed, it works now. Weird.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 95next