After you edited it, it is more clear now. You should have phrased it that way to begin with.

Because saving video games and stopping the killing of children are mutually exclusive???

Out of curiosity how is life without systemd better? What does it taste like?

100%. If they used Linux they would actually have to contribute their improvements back. Because Sony went with FreeBSD they get to use all that community code and build their product on top of it. Win win for Sony as a corp. not so great for the rest of us.

Imagine if FreeBSD had all the graphics pipeline improvements that Sony undoubtedly have added in house.

You’d be surprised. The amount of times I saw people go from 600€ hp laptops to 1800€ MacBooks only to think that Macs are amazing and windows is terrible is quite high. At least double digit.

I’m not sure this is true. From a non-technical user perspective Linux is as visible on the steam deck as FreeBSD is on the PS5. Yah it’s there, but you don’t see it unless you try.

The reason I wouldn’t give advice if you didn’t want it because unwanted unsolicited advice tends to be useless and annoying for most people. If you didn’t want the advice I wouldn’t waste my time.

My advice is to focus on being able to organize your thoughts and write them out in a cohesive structured way.

This helps you:

1. Express yourself in a clear, understandable, and perhaps persuasive way.
2. Organize your own personal wants, needs, and desires introspectively.

Both of these are important life skills that are extremely beneficial. Using a LLM to organize and clarify positions is like using a crutch when you should be in physical therapy. On top of this using a LLM completely erases any personality in your writing and replaces it with corpo style speak.

Practicing organizing and expressing your ideas (like physical therapy) can be hard and sometimes painful. But you get better.

Using a LLM is like refusing to go to physical therapy and using crutches for the rest of your life by choice. Easier in the short term but bad for your own quality of life long term.

Places like lemmy are great for writing practice. Rambling nonsense is pretty universally downloaded. Lemmy forces you to organize and classify what you are thinking and why.

If you want to get started I would recommend the basic “5 Paragraph Essay” structure. In the case of a basic lemmy comment take those principles and make it a 5 sentence structure.

I hope this helps.

Would you want a piece of good faith, sincere advice? If not I can drop things.

Do you always have ideas in the middle of the night and want to post them only to have an RSI flare up and no laptop nearby and decide to use ChatGPT to write your posts?

It’s not just this response. All of your posts read the same way.

Like using AI as a writing assistant is fine and all. But the posts you copy paste over are mostly LLM structured arguments.

Why are you using ChapGPT to make comments on lemmy? What’s the point?

This is incorrect. Functional code bases exist in many production environments. Twitter (pre musk) migrated their bloated code base TO Scala because functional code bases are easier to maintain and understand.

If you think about it, it makes sense, side effect free code will be easier to maintain just due to the lack of side effects.

Small note. Opensuse Leap is EXTREMELY stable. Just as stable as RHEL and more stable than non-LTS Ubuntu. It’s just less well marketed in the English speaking world.

I can’t speak for general use. But use it to:

1. Build Rust artifacts
2. Rebuild static sites, upload them to a bucket, then clear the CDN cache.

It works perfectly for me and I have not run into issues. But it might be bad for other people. I just know it works well for me.

I use forjero with forgero runners.

Basicly 100% compatible with GitHub actions and all locally run via podman.

Strong recommend. It’s all designed to work together and everything just works.

https://forgejo.org/docs/latest/admin/runner-installation/

Ask Cisco how they feel about it. There is a precedence of companies using copy left licensed software and the community benefiting from it.

If companies are just going to be blatantly criminal and violate software licenses they were going to do that anyways. I’m not sure how much experience you have working in or with mega corps but the ones I have worked with in the past HATE the idea of opening themselves up to being so blatantly liable.

When I worked in big tech we had a license scanner that checked the libraries we were using. Anything strongly copyleft would be flagged and we would be contacted by legal.

You might have experienced working with companies that act otherwise. I encourage you to call them out, maybe work with the FSF to get another Cisco style ruling.

Funny you mention ZFS though. It’s not the GPL that was the issue. It is CDDL that’s incompatible. GPL is generally comparable with foss licenses. MIT, MPL, Apache, BSD all are comparable. It’s just CDDL that’s incompatible with copyleft in general.

If you think the community will benefit more from MIT licensed software than copyleft I think you need to look harder at the modern corporate world. Corporations are not altruistic.

This being said I’m not sure there is much more to be said here. You’ve gone to saying I believe in magic and that there are corporate GPL conspiracies. I just don’t see the proof and I think there is not much more to be gained by such talk.

If “theft” is your only concern yes. It’s a common misconception that copyleft licenses stops rich companies from stealing. It does not.

I am more concerned about societal enrichment vs corporate enrichment.

If you release some code under MIT that a company finds useful, they could take it, improve it a bit, and resell it back to the community. This enriches the company at the expense of the community. Without the original code the company could have never taken it as a basis to sell and the community that wrote the code gets nothing.

If you release that same code as AGPL the company can take it, improve it and sell it to the community. BUT the difference is that the community now benefits from those improvements too. Maybe more improvements happen. Maybe a second company takes those improvements and sells them too. The community would have all the improvements and would benefit from greater competition.

With copy left licenses. The community is enriched and companies are enriched.

With MIT style licenses. Companies are enriched at the expense of the community.

I mean you can’t steal open source code if you tried. The code is too respectful of your freedoms. I don’t think anyone is arguing against you here.

In terms of algorithms, nothing. But you were the one who mentioned algorithms. I am speaking of code in general. I do want for persons to contribute back to the community if they use community sourced code. I don’t think we can trust corporations to be altruistic.

This all being said in your earlier message you were implying it’s all about ego. I was just saying it is not about ego.

For me it’s all about community resources and societal enrichment.

CC0 vs CC-SA is actually a really good (rough) analogy.

I will say shortness is a major advantage of the MIT license. Easy to understand.

For the MPL 2.0 here is a good short reference.

https://www.tldrlegal.com/license/mozilla-public-license-2-0-mpl-2