Just a dorky trans woman on the internet.

My other presences on the fediverse:
@copygirl@fedi.anarchy.moe
@copygirl@vt.social

  • 0 Posts
  • 13 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle


  • Could you please provide some sources for that? I’d like to know more.

    First of all though, there is no such thing as a “hostile fork”. Being able to fork a project, for any reason, is the entire point of open source. And to be fair, not wanting to continue working for a for-profit company for free is a very good reason.

    And yeah, when you suddenly turn a FOSS project that’s been developed with the help of a bunch of contributors, into a for-profit company, without making a big fuss about it beforehand and allow the contributors and community to weigh in, then yeah, that’s a hostile takeover of sorts, at least in my opinion. Developers gotta make money, but they could’ve done that by creating a new brand instead of taking over that of a previously completely FOSS project. Forgejo is preventing that exact thing from happening by joining Codeberg (a non-profit).



    1. There is the --download-sections option. Looking at it, you might want to use --download-sections "*0:00-1:00".
    2. I briefly checked with --list-thumbnails and it doesn’t look like YouTube offers any square ones, so I would look into using ImageMagick to edit the image with a command. I doubt yt-dlp allows you to do any sort of image manipulation out of the box.

  • There used to be this service called Flattr, and it’s still around, but I’m honestly not sure how it works anymore. The way it used to work is you set a monthly amount you’re willing to contribute, you get to specify which projects to support, either one time, or recurring, and then your contribution is split up between the projects you chose to support.

    I don’t know if this is an ideal system, because some creators might end up staying unsupported even though people are using their creations, others end up reminding their audience constantly to use the service and support them, so they end up with more than a similar creator not reminding their audience.

    In the end, I think the best thing for all creators would would be universal basic income. Everyone is taken care of such they can survive and pay for necessities, and then they can just create stuff for others to enjoy, for free. (Oh, the humanity!) No trying to convince people to share part of their hard-earned money just for basic survival.






  • Whether or not it’s a good change is likely mostly subjective. I’m guessing Discord made the switch to be more in line with other mainstream social media platforms, and to reduce confusion.

    Personally, I kind of like the old way more. It means there could be 10000 different people with basically the same name. Other than paying for a specific number, there is no issue with a person grabbing a handle and then it not being available to anyone else. Otherwise, eventually, a lot of handles will be used up, maybe even dead, so people have to come up with increasingly creative ways to get a unique handle – or just settle on adding some numbers to the end.

    I’d even go a step further myself and remove handles completely. Just use a random unique identifier, like a hash or GUID for the user – which a lot of platforms do under the hood anyway, since you can change your handle in many of them – and use invite codes, QR codes or similar to add friends. We don’t need this username / handle rotting that just gets worse over time.