The funny thing is... for me it wasn't even the API changes, it was how Steve reacted to the community feedback. If you need to make your app profitable that's fine by me, but don't ignore your customers so bluntly. They could've easily worked politely with devs to find an agreeable API price, find alternative funding streams for those devs, etc. They did none of that, instead Steve acted like a jerk.

This is definitely top 10 Linux memes of all time for me.

and that it’s owned by Google.

I mean yes, but it's patent irrevocably royalty free (so long as you don't sue people claiming WebM/P as your own/partially your own work), so it's effectively owned by the public.

Google hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer implementations of the WebM Specifications, where such license applies only to those patent claims, both currently owned by Google and acquired in the future, licensable by Google that are necessarily infringed by implementation of the WebM Specifications. If You or your agent or exclusive licensee institute or order or agree to the institution of patent litigation against any entity (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that any implementation of the WebM Specifications constitutes direct or contributory patent infringement, or inducement of patent infringement, then any rights granted to You under the License for the WebM Specifications shall terminate as of the date such litigation is filed. "WebM Specifications" means the specifications to the WebM codecs as embodied in the source code to the WebM codecs or any written description of such specifications, in either case as distributed by Google.

Source: https://www.webmproject.org/license/bitstream/

(But Dark, that's WebM not WebP! -- they share the same license: https://groups.google.com/...)

If you're wondering who but don't want to read the article:

Their report urges federal agencies to investigate and potentially go to court over the wealth of information that H&R Block, TaxAct and Tax Slayer shared with the social media giant.

Thanks for the update and the hard work behind the scenes to keep things online!

It's 100% a new problem. There's established precedent for things costing different amounts depending on their intended use.

For example, buying a consumer copy of song doesn't give you the right to play that song in a stadium or a restaurant.

Training an entire AI to make potentially an infinite number of derived works from your work is 100% worthy of requiring a special agreement. This even goes beyond simple payment to consent; a climate expert might not want their work in an AI which might severely mischatacterize the conclusions, or might want to require that certain queries are regularly checked by a human, etc

I think the problem there is (likely) more the social media than the phones. I grew up with high schoolers having phones in the classroom in 2009-2013; Twitter and Facebook were the big two, and Instagram wasn't what it is now. Even then, Facebook & Twitter could kind of suck/cause drama way more than just the more basic things phones can be used for cameras, calculators, web browsers, and messaging family & friends.

"Addictive social media" in particular, is probably where congress's eyes need to be placed. That sounds like what this union is saying as well doing a quick skim, so 👍👍 .

Have people noticed how much popretary java code ProtonMail requires when using a web browser for email?

You mean JavaScript; particularly, https://github.com/ProtonMail/WebClients.

Also, why the required login on their free VPN service if they are all about privacy and encryption?

Because they need to limit how many instances of the VPN you're concurrently accessing somehow.

Why do they want someone’s network traffic in order to use their free VPN?

To use a VPN, you by definition are giving someone your network traffic.

Over the past 6 months my suspicion grows bigger and bigger of who is behind Proton, the agenda behind starting the service, and how it caught on? Why don’t free encrypted anti-government services catch on?

I'm not even touching this...

Until ProtonVPN removes login requirement and release VPN server code under open source license like RiseupVPN or CalyxVPN

That would be meaningless. You login to a protonmail account, which you can create anonymously. The server code can also never be verified to be what's running on the servers.

I will choose to treat Proton like a spy agency.

Go for it.

For those wondering, it seems to be this prison run by the state of Louisiana https://doc.louisiana.gov/...

That only stands true when the issue is not being actively exploited.

This is dumb. Proton encrypts your private keys with your password.

Just upload the key to your encrypted proton account like you're supposed to, and let them take care of the signing/encryption/etc.

Apple didn't invent the ARM laptop

Basically this, he does a lot of good stuff, but since he does it "for views" some people hate him/think he's "taking advantage of their situations."

IMO, he didn't make those situations, and he's providing an avenue for those situations to get resolved (even if maybe someone has to get "embarrassed" by virtue of appearing as the benefactor of one of his videos -- to be clear, he to my knowledge never does anything like "kiss my feat and I'll give you a million dollars" to these people).

Kind of one of those, "there's always going to be someone who doesn't like you" things; if you ask me, he's overall doing good.

You are literally trusting them to encrypt all your mail.

If you don't trust their encryption, respectfully, don't use them. It's faux logic to "need" a secondary key that isn't cloud synced in an end to end encrypted mail vault.

This is an unnecessary product complication, and I agree with proton that you're more than likely to get it wrong and your "more secure" key will be used in a less secure manor.

It's the same reason most people shouldn't self host things like Bitwarden. Doing it yourself is not a security feature anymore than wiring your own home is protecting it.

I had a buddy who was a Linux ARM laptop fanatic back in like 2014. Microsoft had been trying to make Windows on ARM a thing for years before that.

Apple was the first to popularize it but it's been a work in progress if you've been paying attention for a LOT longer. What helped Apple is all the work they did on their own ARM chips for iOS. They managed to get pretty close to x86 performance in an ARM chip. They also had an app store of apps that could run on them and an emulator for things that wouldn't.

Every time Microsoft tried nobody would release ARM builds... People just bought the x86 laptops. It's the same chicken and egg problem desktop Linux has had for years.

The safest option would be for Lemmy to implement OAuth and apps that aren't in some "official front end for xyz website mode" to authorize via OAuth with the backend instead of via credentials.

I think it's fine. Calling this an "interaction" is a pretty significant understatement.

You're going to get sued over a handful of text or not liking somebody. If you decide to run a campaign to harass an employee into quitting/suicide/etc, and throw in death threats, along with packages delivered to their residence... You should 100% get what's coming to you.

It's really starting to feel like a legitimately good Reddit alternative around here, not just "Reddit like" or "Reddit light" and that's really awesome 😊

He should enter politics.

Please don't do this to us.

Evil only needs to succeed every now and then, good needs to constantly win.