Å is in Finnish Keyboards, but totally useless. F12 is easily accessible in Hacker's Keyboard. ∆ is in Gboard.
There no gui, you use openscad to generate STL and view that in Android STL-viewer. You can automatize it so that it is almost like the real thing.
file_to_watch=$1
last_modified=$(stat -c %Y "$file_to_watch")
while true; do
current_modified=$(stat -c %Y "$file_to_watch")
if [ "$last_modified" != "$current_modified" ]; then
openscad $1 -o $1.stl
last_modified="$current_modified"
fi
sleep 1 # Check every second
done
https://freedoom.github.io/ does that for the still proprietary DOOM assets. Though the DOOM engine itself is open source, so a slight different situation than Command and Conquer.
Wealth generated on top of underpaid labor is a reoccurring theme -- and in this case maybe surprisingly exacerbated by LLMs.
Would this be different if the underlying code had a viral license? If google's infrastructure was built on a GPL'ed libcurl [0], would they have investment in the code/a team with resources to evaluate security reports (slop or otherwise)? Ditto for libxml.
Does GPL help the linux kernel get investment from it's corporate users?
[0] Perhaps an impossible hypothetical. Would google have skipped over the imaginary GPL'ed libcurl or libxml for a more permissively licensed library? And even if they didn't, would a big company's involvement in an openly developed ecosystem create asymmetric funding/goals, a la XMPP or Nix?
Copyleft licenses are made to support freedom for everyone and particularly end-users. They only limit freedom of developers / maintainers to exploit the code and users.
> Does GPL help the linux kernel get investment from it's corporate users?
GPL has helped "linux kernel the project" greatly, but companies invest in it out of their self-interest. They want to benefit from upstream improvements and playing nicely by upstreaming changes is just much cheaper than maintaining own kernel fork.
On other side you have companies like Sony that used BSD OS code for their game consoles for decades and contributed shit.
I would have thought supporting libcurl and libxml would also be in a company's self-interest. Is that companies do this for GPL'ed linux kernel but not BSD evidence that strong copyleft licensing limits the extent to which OSS projects are exploited/under-resourced?
> I would have thought supporting libcurl and libxml would also be in a company's self-interest.
Unfortunately majority of companies don't have something special they really need to add to cURL. They okay using it as is - so they have no reason to pay salary to cURL developers regardless of licensing.
Yes they want it to be secure, but as always nobody except few very large orgs care about security for real.
> Is that companies do this for GPL'ed linux kernel but not BSD evidence that strong copyleft licensing limits the extent to which OSS projects are exploited/under-resourced?
It certainly helped with "under-resourced" part. Whatever you considered "exploited" is up to discussion. From project perspective ofc copyleft licensing benefited the project.
Linus Torvalds end up with a good amount of publicity and is now somewhat well set-off, but almost all other kernel developers live in obscurity earning somewhat average salaries. I pretty sure we can all agree that Linux Kernel made a massive positive impact on whole humanity and compared to that payoff to stakeholders is rather small IMO.
I can see "ill defined" causing problems. But isn't an explicit code of conduct more defined than none? (Assuming I'm reading that correctly from your comment.)
There aren't too many epithets floating around that offend me specifically. And I haven't heard anyone say I shouldn't/don't exist. So it's hard for me personally to feel the need for CoC and the like. But I'm all for policy that protects everyone against that kind of abuse -- which seems to be on the rise. Are there better alternatives?
I'm curious if having JS makes the code more approachable for potential contributors or extension authors. And then if a project does "better" (measure utility to users? sustainability/longevity?) with more bugs but more engagement. Maybe that's just another way of asking "Cathedral or Bazaar?"
I think that's a good take. Market pressure for durability decreases with brand awareness. Though I think the article argues there's little market pressure regardless.
I'm also worried it's all survivorship bias. If you acquired 100 items in 2010 and 5 of them lasted until 2025, it's hard to say if the 5 surviving would be the same 5 from another household or if the items you still have were all on the hardier end of that particular items quality distribution. Another house with 100 items from 2010 will have a different 5 remaining in 2025. If that's the case, the chance you'd buy those 5 again and even have 3 with the same 15 year life span is (1/20)^3 (I think. is that math right?)
Survivorship bias is an important thing to consider, but the weird thing about it is that although sometimes (usually?) people have a blind spot for it, other times I think it gets used as a kind of "just so" explanation for degradation in quality because it's hard to refute.
My experience with clothing kind of suggests it's not just survivorship bias. I once had a pair of pants that lasted maybe 10 years or so with regular washing, each use (yes I know, not ideal, I don't do that anymore), and I had to replace them. When I ordered a new pair, from the same company, same model, I noticed the new ones didn't last nearly as long, maybe 2 years, and seemed thinner. I emailed the company about this, and they acknowledged that they had made the fabric thinner, and even gave me the old and new fabric densities. I think clothing is one area where new brands have come in to partially move the needle back toward quality a teeny weeny bit, but experiences like that, tracking the actual material quality of the same products over time, leads me to conclude it's not always just random survivorship bias.
I wouldn’t mind that much if switching to another brand/model would solve the problem. But sometimes I order half a dozen of the most well-reviewed alternatives, and they are all worse in some way in comparison.
This comes up for me most often with running shoes. By the time the model shoe I've loved wears out, it'll be out of production and the n+1 iteration re-balanced whatever decisions to make the shoe a worse-for-me fit.
(It's tempting to think the big-sneaker cabal conspires to ensure consumers are perceptually exploring options)
.8% is a bit misleading. Public Land is 37% (as of 1991) [1] of the state. The ADK park is state owned/managed and huge. Catskill region also has lots of public land. They're both amazing places I'm happy don't look like the US side of Niagara falls [2]
I can't think of a more bloated way to communicate than putting a browser in the middle. For some quick numbers, compare web browser input latency to terminal [0] where one might run an IRC client. Even emacs [1,2] is fast and light in comparison.
Literate programming tools that weave/tangle code and documentation don't play well with significant whitespace. Not a problem for me, but I think it's on a valid line of complaints.
It will generate properly indented code when tangled as in:
def foo():
if 1 == 1
print('1 == 1, shocking!')
Note that it puts in precisely two extra spaces for each line in the tangled `body`, which is the amount used in the block named `function` where it references `body`. If you used 4 spaces of indentation, it would use 4 in the tangled output. I've also used noweb and don't recall this being an issue, however that was not with Python so it's possible I just didn't notice a problem with it.
I stand corrected! I'm guessing my own bad formatting lead me astray at some point. I tried to come up with a pathological example that'd break with noweb just now and had no luck.
I very strongly disagree. The most successful implementation of literate programming is the Jupyter Notebook, formerly called iPython Notebook. Even when you write it as raw markdown, there's no issue mixing documentation with triple-backtick code blocks.
Maybe you're thinking of mixing Python with HTML? Python based HTML templating can be ugly, and the significant indentation of Python is a very poor mix for replacing Javascript in whitespace-agnostic HTML.
I thought tools like jupyter and rmarkdown are better described as narratives[0] (lab notebooks and report generators) separate from and almost antagonistic to literate programming[1]. At least as I've been exposed to them, notebooks don't easily facilitate code reuse -- libraries aren't written in notebooks but could be written with literate programming tools.
Technically comments are considered blank lines, so indentation can be arbitrary. This is against PEP8/linters, but it's not a formatting error.
Triple quoted docstrings just require that the initial marker (""" or ''') is indented properly (since they are not considered blank lines). All contained text, and the closing marker, can be at any indentation level. This is the cleanest way to include a page of free form documentation, mid anywhere.
Is there a good interface to (GUI?) openscad from termux?