Did you just post a license for your humblebrag soapbox rant about NixOS?
Edit: I’ll leave some points where I agree since you’re very fixated on/preoccupied with who won this debate (or something). In the long run, most Nix users are wishing for a complete rewrite of NixOS with Nix’s modern approach codified as standard. After all, to your point, Nix is just a massive pile of Perl and Bash under the hood. It could unquestionably be more capable if they had the benefit of hindsight (or a proper type system built into the language) like GUIX which uses Scheme as their DSL has. AFAIK, though, Nix flakes are a feature that GUIX badly needs.
For GUIX: Does anyone know about content-addressed derivations in GUIX? I figure that might also be a place where Nix bests GUIX but perhaps some GUIX(pronounced geeks) can correct me before I search for answers.
I don’t think they believe that; I think they either (a) think a human lawyer would understand it during the class-action suit after the the AI scrapes it anyway, or (b) more likely, they’re doing it to make a point as a matter of principle.
Either seems pretty fucking reasonable, to be honest!
It’s just noise. Assuming US jurisdiction where many of the AI companies are based; either AI scraping is fair use, in which case the license is meaningless, or AI scraping is not fair use, in which case they already have the copyright.
It’s the other way around, onlinepersona already has the copyright. Asserting that the copyright is non-commercial changes nothing. The default is non-commercial. The default is nobody can use it. They are applying a more permissive copyright than the default.
I don’t really care to be honest. Clearly, I’m not as smart as you and would be in hell with maintaining my version-controlled flake that provisions rock-solid stable nix-configs for 8 different machines on a variety of vastly different architectures if I had your 10x dev brain.
Mass adoption doesn’t necessarily mean Linux newbie. NixOS seems to be targeting the DevOps crowd with its stability/immutability – that is, people who would be comfortable building their system from a config file that doesn’t have a UI. They’re already basically doing that with other tools.
I find it actually incredible that you don’t know anyone in DEVOPS that uses it. Either you’re at a giant company with a custom stack that replicates its functionality (Meta employees that I asked didn’t know about it) or you don’t talk to other devs. It’s like THE devops tool nowadays (only taking a second place to Docker/OCI).
Removed by mod
🙄
Did you just post a license for your humblebrag soapbox rant about NixOS?
Edit: I’ll leave some points where I agree since you’re very fixated on/preoccupied with who won this debate (or something). In the long run, most Nix users are wishing for a complete rewrite of NixOS with Nix’s modern approach codified as standard. After all, to your point, Nix is just a massive pile of Perl and Bash under the hood. It could unquestionably be more capable if they had the benefit of hindsight (or a proper type system built into the language) like GUIX which uses Scheme as their DSL has. AFAIK, though, Nix flakes are a feature that GUIX badly needs.
For GUIX: Does anyone know about content-addressed derivations in GUIX? I figure that might also be a place where Nix bests GUIX but perhaps some GUIX(pronounced geeks) can correct me before I search for answers.
They actually believe AI scraping lemmy will follow the link to the license, understand it, and except their comment.
I don’t think they believe that; I think they either (a) think a human lawyer would understand it during the class-action suit after the the AI scrapes it anyway, or (b) more likely, they’re doing it to make a point as a matter of principle.
Either seems pretty fucking reasonable, to be honest!
It’s just noise. Assuming US jurisdiction where many of the AI companies are based; either AI scraping is fair use, in which case the license is meaningless, or AI scraping is not fair use, in which case they already have the copyright.
What? How would an AI company have copyright over @onlinepersona@programming.dev’s comment? That makes no sense at all.
It’s the other way around, onlinepersona already has the copyright. Asserting that the copyright is non-commercial changes nothing. The default is non-commercial. The default is nobody can use it. They are applying a more permissive copyright than the default.
Ah, I see what you mean now.
Removed by mod
I don’t really care to be honest. Clearly, I’m not as smart as you and would be in hell with maintaining my version-controlled flake that provisions rock-solid stable nix-configs for 8 different machines on a variety of vastly different architectures if I had your 10x dev brain.
MIT License
He must watch Rick and Morty.
WTFPL
Mass adoption doesn’t necessarily mean Linux newbie. NixOS seems to be targeting the DevOps crowd with its stability/immutability – that is, people who would be comfortable building their system from a config file that doesn’t have a UI. They’re already basically doing that with other tools.
Removed by mod
I find it actually incredible that you don’t know anyone in DEVOPS that uses it. Either you’re at a giant company with a custom stack that replicates its functionality (Meta employees that I asked didn’t know about it) or you don’t talk to other devs. It’s like THE devops tool nowadays (only taking a second place to Docker/OCI).
It does, in fact, work on Mac, FreeBSD, Windows, and actually almost anywhere that SSH can be run.
This comment has a closed source license.
How is this person even in devops lol