Yeah like, lol

Nono, Americans made peace with the natives!

That’s truly naive. The problem isn’t the man but that all the judiciary systems are in hand of people who clearly want to dismantle the democratic system

Dragon age origins

The civilians.

Because FOSS stands for both free software and people’s freedom. No one exists without a government except for external forces that are stronger than the government itself (lobbying is a way to strong arm a government), but this is another matter entirely.

FOSS organisations should exist outside a government because governments are easily corruptible, which is has happened again and again throughout history and is slowly happening right now. And obeying the law not to be thrown in jail is a nice argument, yes, and a shitty one at that: imagine how good would be a German citizen to abide to the government rule during the Nazi period. This doesn’t mean either that they shouldn’t follow any laws, but that, much like any international organisation, they should be international laws agreed on by multiple nations.

Which is essentially the crux of the matter: as long as FOSS projects work within the framework of a government (the US), the project can be easily hijacked, turned into something that goes against people interests. What are the people interests? In short, the minimum denominator is equality, freedom to speak, a right to privacy.

If FOSS projects do have to follow a government’s laws, then contributing to one is free work for corporations: laws can be changed and a democratic society can turn into a non-democratic entity, with laws that restrict the freedom of its citizens; in EU they try to pass a “chat control” law to make cryptography useless [by adding a back door] and while I believe it won’t pass no doubt it’s a worrisome sign. At the end of the day who would benefit the most from FOSS but companies, which do so already?

And to reiterate: sometime it’s better to be thrown in prison than to send someone else to their death

It really is. Relying on a government good will to protect people best interests may be the point of failure of FOSS. I hope not but I’m less and less optimistic about the future

Law aren’t always right and governments don’t always do the best neither for the world nor for its citizens. Open source projects and corporations shouldn’t rely on any government, they shouldn’t do the biddings on governments — either “good” or “bad” — and act in people best interests.

Of course this is a pipe dream and what we got is more free work for companies with none the benefits

Yes. If FOSS projects bend the knee to shitty laws just because “they are the law”, then FOSS is free labor for corporations with no gains for the people.

So do I, working with electron is the shit

Tauri v2 just got released, it’s very recent and corps move slowly; besides, rewriting a project in a different framework is a major undertaking, it would be a bad idea to rewrite a major project in Tauri, which is still not as widespread. I’m unfortunate enough to have to work with Electron and Tauri greatly improves on everything that is wrong with Electron. I have no doubt that companies will begin adopt it in the following years (or a similar tool, the underlying architecture is solid).

Obviously but so if the current storage gets corrupted /destroyed, there is no way to restore all that data?

What are the conclusions of the research? Why was it shut down?

There is Tauri which is so much better both from UX and DX.

How is there not political instability and weak governance?

It also can truncate on the BE side when using the damn varchar

It’s truly sad to see people build their own little cages (echo chambers) based on stupid economic systems instead of exchanging ideas peacefully. Which is not a dog whistle, like a certain billionaire with a weird fetish for fake free speech, but an actual request to stop censoring people based on non-hateful beliefs and talk with the other part instead of performing a psycho delenda est and feeling so cool and strong and getting off that dopamine hit. Fuck.

In short, no it makes no sense to ban people based on their non-hateful beliefs. It’s dystopian, it means people stopped listening to others and just pat their backs all the time. Fuck.

You can own “beach” and mountain houses for vacation, it doesn’t necessarily mean you are disgustingly rich. The problem with people owning multiple houses is that they reduce the possibility for other people to buy or own a house, and most of the time they are rented and the landlords don’t have a few houses to rent but tens

Actually owning two or three homes is okay-ish. The problem is when you own tens and rent them all

The users down here trying to teach you what it means while you know it better than them lmao.

“Vote with your wallet” doesn’t mean “if you don’t like it don’t buy it” but if that you don’t like the new iteration of the product reason you shouldn’t buy it, thus letting the company know it wasn’t good enough and they should do better. This premise is flawed because it sounds like some democratic shit, but the only ones who can vote with their wallet are the whales that actually have % on that sweet company revenue: for the average user there is no vote because to matter it would have to scale with other consumers. Something so far unachievable because for a tiny, “loud” minority there is the clueless majority.