And yet, Red Star OS does not open-source any upstream contributions. I'm sure there were some modifications made that were not disclosed in compliance with applicable licenses.
IIRC it's mostly bog-standard. Most of their modifications are either simply changing the branding, changing the i18n files, or adding custom software. That said, it would probably be quite fun to send GPL-compliance requests for source code, I almost want to try :)
Hah, someone ought to tell rms. If anyone would actually go to N. Korea and confront Kim, it would be him. Or maybe the gov't could go after N. Korea on the license violation under the Berne convention? Like tax evasion bringing down Al Capone, though I'm sure it wouldn't work.
Yep. Like the hysteria about China trolling through my (American citizen) data from my phone. CCP probably isn't going to extraordinarily rendition me, whatever horrible, unkind, true-or-untrue things I say about them. The US Government? Fuck no I don't want them going through my data, they've already proven they don't actually give a fuck about the piece of paper from which they derive power.
There’s a whole industry that basically exists to accept these terms from Federal and State government. They skim a few points, get screwed by the receivables for late payment, and accept whatever onerous terms that are imposed.
For example, a global company needs to report on how many Northern Irish employees are Catholic or Protestant to sell crap to New York City. Nobody wants to deal with crap like that, so the reseller sucks it up.
Opened this thread expecting to share this fond gaming memory. I've wished that modern games was more like this more than once. Finding jumps for crossing entire maps was incredibly liberating!
Who could've guessed? It would be interesting to see a "move slow and fix things" approach for once. But I guess it isn't compatible with ruthless expansion.
Haha, this is one of the tamest instances of cutting corners in the news lately. It's not like this is super-secret information either. It's not health, finance, or legal data.
Some people on HN seem to take security much more seriously than necessary, as if security is the most important feature. But in business, it usually isn't.
How usable is this as a general purpose OS? I seldom see people running it outside VMs. How hard is it to find compatible hardware such as wireless cards. Does sleep/suspend work reliably?
Lastly, I just LOVE the aesthetics. Even XFCE could not resist the allure of "improved" themes and also ended up welcoming CSDs.
There is no hardware 3D acceleration at all, but most GPUs supported by FreeBSD and Linux work fine for everyday use. Sleep and suspend are still a work in progress. WiFi and Ethernet support is heavily dependent on FreeBSD drivers, as such not every card is supported but there are a good number of supported devices. In general, a well-supported Linux/BSD machine will likely work well under Haiku (Thinkpads in particular).
For me personally, the biggest thing holding it back from becoming a daily use computer is the lack of a really good web browser. WebPositive has made great strides as the native browser, but it still has a long way to go. There are ports of other mainstream browsers but most are incomplete or unstable.
I sorely miss the era around 2000-2001 where I used BeOS successfully as a daily machine, able to browse the Web, access email, do document management and creation (word processing and spreadsheets), photo editing, music production, and video editing all with native-to-BeOS software. It transformed my Windows 98 machine from a slow, clunky, stuttering mess into a computer that felt like it was from the future. Nothing since has come close to that level of technological Nirvana.
Forget the Web Browser, the biggest barrier is the lack of wireless drivers. I've tried it on a half dozen laptops and couldn't get a single one to work.
At the time I last tried there was no support for USB Wifi, so using a trusty TP-Link wasn't an option.
And (another fun fact) if you want to email EPUBs to your kindle, just make the file extension .png (!?) and it will be automatically converted, without the need for Calibre.
Most people HN would want it since we are power users who like desktop apps. But don’t rob yourself of trying to understand why everyone else doesn’t want to use desktop software to get a book on their Kindle.
For example, my girlfriend is an avid ebook reader but couldn’t be less interested in it. “I can see why that could be useful but... no thanks.”
We like the smell of our own farts too much sometimes. In this case, in the form of “why don’t people want to use more software to do what you were already doing without it?”
> But don’t rob yourself of trying to understand why everyone else doesn’t want to use desktop software to get a book on their Kindle.
Yes, that's a good point. I originally had "Why would you want to go without Calibre when it's so multi-functional?", but changed it to "Who knows why you'd want …" in an aim to sound less confrontational. I seem instead to have gone the other way!
I can download an epub on my mobile. I can email an epub from my mobile.
I can't run calibre from my mobile. I can rename .epub to .png and email that from my mobile.
Yes, I can host calibre somewhere else. No, my technologically savvy friends and family cannot. I also don't want them to depend on me to be able to convert an epub for their kindle when there's a trivial solution that doesn't require additional dependencies.
Because the only feature I've ever needed from Calibre is ePub conversion and Amazon will do that for me without hassle (and without access to desktop computer).
The one thing you can't do as a developer in 2021 is claim innocence while you're letting these companies feast on your visitors data. You do know how these things work and you're assisting surveillance capitalism. You are complicit in your silent embedding of these tracking devices.
Disqus does not track users from GDPR countries by default. My initial story in December 2019 for the Norwegian broadcaster NRK was a result of Disqus not knowing Norway had the GDPR (we are part of EEA, but not EU).
Users are checked based on IP whether they come from a GDPR country. If GDPR, they will be put in private mode. A user needs to create a profile and consent to sharing for tracking to begin.
Norwegian DPA opened an investigation as a result of our stories and Norwegians are now in private mode by default.
Fair to say this is necessary but not sufficient. GDPR covers users within GDPR countries but also European data subjects wherever they are in the world.
This gets repeated over and over on HN but it isn't true. I feel this is because so many try to make GDPR seem too hard and breaking everything (likely people with something to lose).
GDPR is for data in the EU. That is it. Not data outside the EU and not people outside the EU. An American in the EU is covered, an EU citizen in the US is not.
What you are saying would require that the EU could create laws that were above the Supreme Court in the US for example. It simply isn't true.
> I feel this is because so many try to make GDPR seem too hard and breaking everything (likely people with something to lose).
Or people who wish to extend the reach of GDPR so that others outside of the EU are protected too.
> What you are saying would require that the EU could create laws that were above the Supreme Court in the US for example
This is not true for multiple reasons. Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003 specifically "Authorizes fines and/or imprisonment for up to 30 years for U.S. citizens or residents who engage in illicit sexual conduct abroad". The EU could punish US companies that have offices in the EU or income from the EU. Alternatively it could sanction them.
Let me rephrase: If the data is in the EU it is covered by GDPR no matter where the person that creates the data is at (yes in the US too) but the person isn't covered by the GDPR, the data (that is in the EU) is covered. It is not the same thing. What most people seem to think is the EU overreaching and "making laws that reach outsides its borders" is in cases where a foreign company (like Facebook) gets regulated by GDPR even though the company is outside the EU. This is because the data is in the EU and of course data in the EU isn't under US or any other entities law but EU (and member states). If you transfer data outside the EU you either do so illegally or have to follow the rules of the GDPR. It still doesn't reach outside the EU borders. Of course if you do something criminally the EU might judge you no matter where you are at just like the US with PROTECT Act of 2003 but that is another matter.
Hmm. I actually said that because that's what the GDPR training that I was forced to undertake by my employer taught me. That being said, reading the reguglation now shows me that was a misunderstanding.
That being said it wouldn't require the EU to create laws which have jurisdiction above the US supreme court - if a company has any activity within Europe the European courts can act. There are other examples - for example UK libel law allows people under certain circumstances to sue for libel in the UK even if both parties are not UK citizens and the libel itself occurred outside the UK. Another example is the US CFTC which claims jurisdiction over all swaps transactions even if both parties are non-US and the swap itself happened outside the US.
What you are describing in the case of the GDPR would be like a US company - Facebook for example - being regulated by the GDPR. But while Facebook is in the US the data someone in the EU is creating is inside the EU, so it doesn't really matter if Facebook is targeting EU citizens or not since the data is not (at first at least) in the US and transferring it there is illegal if it doesn't follow the GDPR. That being said I'm aware that there are situations where a country will punish something happening elsewhere but it still isn't reaching outside its borders. If the EU want to punish Mark Zuckerberg it cannot touch him or his assets unless they are inside the EU without the cooperation of the local court or government. That was the reason Privacy Shield got overturned.
It isn't, but I'm guessing their argument is that the website owner should get consent before loading their code. Of course in practice basically no one does that and they seem to be banking on that fact.
