Google is requiring *all* apps, regardless of how you install them, or from what app store you install them, to be signed *by them*. This means that every app available on F-Droid must be signed (and developer dues paid) also or it won't be installable
Yep. And this just means that F-Droid has to have one person sign up and submit all of the apps for signature, as I said.
The point, which you seemed to have missed entirely, is that regardless of what you're running and what I'm running, the world is running rather a lot of Linux and Unix on all kinds of hardware, and it's often under the hood so it's not readily obvious which is in play.
Besides using fingerprinting for networked devices, mostly the information on what's being used is out there anyway. BSDs used to be massively popular because they were what ran on what you had when you had pretty much anything. Now that's Linux, some version of it anyway. And if anyone really cares, they can dust off those old architectures on some kernel version.
The BSD license was favorable enough in its time, and it led BSD to significant success. But it didn't protect the people and corporations willing to give away the most code, which is why Linux dominated. Now it enjoys network effects. Why would I not want things to work as much the same as possible on everything I need to work with? Especially since it runs on everything.
Yes, there is still BSD out there, but there's very little reason for someone to use it as the basis of a product except wanting the option to abuse their user base. Apple went with NeXTStep not just because of The Jobs, but also because of the appeal of the license. It matches walled gardens.
Because the dictionary publishers didn't copy all those works into their training corpus
They didn't write the ad copy that way on purpose.
When Bill Clinton signed the CDA in 1996, he chortled that it would increase competition. Of course it did the exact opposite, and led to the dominance of Fox News and Sinclair Media and the death of factual reporting. It's not quite ded yet, but this is the move that will lead to our having ONLY full-on state media allowed in our supposedly free country.
Play some songs I haven't heard before, when it cannot know what I have heard, is the perfect example of something AI cannot do. The AI company claiming it can do so is indistinguishable from when AI claims it has done something it cannot do because there is not enough information, but it will give you its fabricated horseshit answer with full confidence.
You have the perfect nickname for a BSD enthusiast. The whole reason I wound up running Linux was BSDickhead elitism. I had done multiple installs of various Unixes including SunOS on a sun3, which is not only BSD, it's weird and you have to do weird shit to install it. But since the BSD documentation was shit at the time that told you nothing you needed to know, I found myself a little stuck on stupid shit like how big my partitions should be. I even know some FreeBSD users and as it turned out, they were fucking worthless and treated me like an idiot for asking questions the documentation would have answered if it were any good.
So I installed slackware and that was that, the install was trivial, the community was orders of magnitude more helpful and welcoming, the documentation was actually useful. I've installed a lot of different BSDs over the years (including on some IBM model 135s for example) and literally all of them were better than FreeBSD was then, even the ones that are older than that!
BSDicks can only blame themselves for Linux eating their lunch.
"BSD today is bigger than Linux."
Hahhahahahahahbahahabbahaha
"That is a complete fluke, an accident."
Completely wrong.
"What the world wanted was Unix running on inexpensive commodity PC hardware. That's it."
Right, the average user does not give a shit about the license. But wrong, because how they got it was from people who do care. BSD already existed and they could already be contributing to it, but they chose not to. And they made that choice specifically based on the license, which we know because so many major contributors told us so. You are ignoring what they said because it suits your prejudice.
Nope. Google is still set to kill F-Droid later this year when they turn on mandatory developer certificates which will require developers to pay Google and hand over their personal information, regardless of what app store they want to distribute through.
Nonsense. There's no reason to expect that mandatory developer certificates will kill F-Droid, at all. F-Droid will need one guy to pay the $25 fee and identify himself. Unless they can use the open source developer exception that Google has talked about (but hasn't announced any details, AFAIK).
This will essentially kill F-Droid for casual users (their main target is almost certainly NewPipe). Yes you can still use F-Droid but you'll have to do a 24 hour delay before you can install F-Droid.
That's a bigger issue, because Google's announced policy is to require that apps respect intellectual property, which would include not distributing apps that blatantly violate terms of service. Most likely F-Droid will have to stop distributing NewPipe if they want to be in Google Play. If dropping NewPipe is enough to kill F-Droid, then I guess that'll do it.
And, as usual, everyone in the North will roll their eyes at all the whiny babies in the rest of the country.
Those in the north will complain because the portion of the winter they go to work in darkness will increase, and it will be darker. Those in the center will also complain louder because they'll start going to work/school in the dark.
Those in the south will be confused about why everyone else is complaining, but they'll lose.
Actually, producing shoddy code is precisely what Microsoft is know for.
It's really not. 20 years ago, yes, but they've grown up and wised up. I know lots of excellent engineers at Microsoft, and I know they do good work, and they report that their colleagues do, too.
And note that I'm no MS fanboy. I hated them with a purple passion in the late 80s and early 90s, and swore off Windows entirely in 2001. I did finally break down and buy a Windows laptop a couple of years ago because I bought a CNC milling machine and the good software is Windows only, but that's the only thing I use it for.
Some of it is the licensing, with the BSD license having fewer restrictions on reuse, but a lot of it was the early fighting over Unix copyrights, including between AT&T and BSD, when Unix proved to be a viable commercial OS
That was a thing, but it was resolved well before Linux became popular.
Both have their pros and cons and places where one may be a better choice than the other.
IME FreeBSD is realistically almost all drawbacks because development happens on Linux. OpenBSD has its selling point I guess, but my personal experiences with it taught me that if you aren't qualified to fix your own problems with e.g. the kernel, you should avoid it. NetBSD has some meaning as the last available OS for a lot of old hardware, so I guess there's that? In-kernel ZFS is cool but hardly worth the hassle unless what you are building is a pure filer, when the unbundled ZFS works well enough.
Weird that Haiku picked it up, what with actual BeOS having been chock-full of GNU utilities. I know because I did the first released port of GNU file for BeOS.
No it is infectious and some thing to be avoided.
Oh, that explains why BSD which predates Linux is an also-ran, while Linux is the world's most popular operating system and many major contributors told us in so many words that they chose to contribute to Linux instead of BSD specifically because of the license.
I bet the human brain is a kludge. -- Marvin Minsky
