Yes. And that doesn’t excuse it; a moderator should be better than the community they moderate.

“childish trolls in this community”, “this community is full of trolls”, “90% of folks here dont get the issue and rather troll”

The people who coined the term “open source” are the same people who founded OSI. If you don’t like their term, don’t use it.

It doesn’t actually contribute to the discussion.

Yes. You are free to distribute it in any way you wish. Some methods, like printing books, have a raw material cost. You can choose to pay someone to distribute via that method, or if you really want to, you can do the printing yourself at no cost but your own time and effort.

If you don’t want to give it away for free, then just don’t make it FOSS. It’s that simple. People use free-libre licenses because they want to use that license model. If you don’t want to, then don’t.

That’s not a meaningful comparison because it splits Ubuntu by version but all of Arch is a single category. We’d need to roll up the Ubuntu users for it to be apples to apples.

Someone is going back over their contributions, right?

Right?

Debian and Fedora have ports, though not all packages are available, and you’ll probably be doing a lot of porting if you want anything else.

But this bit from the uConsole R-01 product page might be relevant to you:

uConsole R-01 is a highly experimental model and requires some experience with Linux systems & FOSS. We strongly recommend all beginners choose other models.

Good news, the GNU Image Manipulation Program is designed for manipulating photos

swapoff, reformat, swapon?

Also make sure the drive isn’t dying.

The employer doesn’t claim any intellectual property rights over my work product. I’m not able to find anywhere that the proprietary vendor does either.

You’re probably in the clear. Legalese isn’t so opaque that you would miss a section about this.

Of course, that doesn’t stop them from suing you if they decide your work could be very profitable for them.

Even at big companies, devs get flexibility because they need to run a bunch of random stuff that can look sketchy to security software.

⻚⍿⯽⎻⾘⾄♎ⲱ⬆⒍Ⲑ

I hope all your stuff supports Unicode.

I don’t have an answer for you, I just want to tell you that the plural of schema is schemata.

Broadcom is so good at it, they wrecked VMware years before even completing the acquisition.

Right, but it’s not a pure list of facts. When you set it to paper, it’s unique, and you could argue it’s art. In fact, a quick Google search found one such example: https://www.saatchiart.com/art/Painting-Shopping-list-1/2146403/10186433/view

Granted, that one was presumably intended to be a work of art on creation and your weekly shopping list isn’t, but the intent during creation isn’t all that important for US copyright law. You create it, you get the rights.

I’m not aware of any federal case law on copyright and AI. Happy to read some if you have a suggestion.

copyright only protects them from people republishing their content

This is not correct. Copyright protects reproduction, derivation, distribution, performance, and display of a work.

People also ingest their content and can make derivative works without problem. OpenAI are just doing the same, but at a level of ability that could be disruptive to some companies.

Yes, you can legally make derivative works, but without license, it has to be fair use. In this case, where not only did they use one whole work in its entirety, they likely scraped thousands of whole NYT articles.

This isn’t even really very harmful to the NYT, since the historical material used doesn’t even conflict with their primary purpose of producing new news.

This isn’t necessarily correct either. I assume they sell access to their archives, for research or whatever. Being able to retrieve articles verbatim through chatgpt does harm their business.

That is not correct. Copyright subsists in all original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/102

Legally, when you write your shopping list, you instantly have the rights to that work, no publication or registration necessary. You can choose to publish it later, or not at all, but you still own the rights. Someone can’t break into your house, look at your unpublished works, copy them, and publish them like they’re their originals.