2·
16 days agoWow, that sounds like a pain. I’ve replaced regulators in two different cars and they were both much easier than that! The glass stays in the door and it’s just a few bolts and an electrical connector.
- 6 Posts
- 498 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: August 14th, 2025
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
#waffle1666 4/5 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 🟩⭐🟩⭐🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 🟩⭐🟩⭐🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 🔥 streak: 1 wafflegame.net
1·1 month agoI’m considering rewriting the entire thing from scratch so we can use a license that requires attribution
From what I’ve heard from others around here, attribution is required with AGPL as long as the author puts a copyright in somehow. Beyond that I’m clueless, but this whole thing seems like people got really worked up over their own mistake. Lesson learned, I guess.
This has already been debated on the internet and I’m not an expert so I’m giving up. I guess it boils down to what is a “copyright”, and if the source in this case (PyLova) has a copright notice that needs to be copied over. That’s beyond my expertise.
Edit:
Read this if you want to, but I'm not completely convinced that I'm right
“5”. Conveying Modified Source Versions.
You may convey a work based on the Program, or the modifications to produce it from the Program, in the form of source code under the terms of section 4, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
a) The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified it, and giving a relevant date.
b) The work must carry prominent notices stating that it is released under this License and any conditions added under section 7. This requirement modifies the requirement in section 4 to “keep intact all notices”.
c) You must license the entire work, as a whole, under this License to anyone who comes into possession of a copy. This License will therefore apply, along with any applicable section 7 additional terms, to the whole of the work, and all its parts, regardless of how they are packaged. This License gives no permission to license the work in any other way, but it does not invalidate such permission if you have separately received it.
d) If the work has interactive user interfaces, each must display Appropriate Legal Notices; however, if the Program has interactive interfaces that do not display Appropriate Legal Notices, your work need not make them do so.A compilation of a covered work with other separate and independent works, which are not by their nature extensions of the covered work, and which are not combined with it such as to form a larger program, in or on a volume of a storage or distribution medium, is called an “aggregate” if the compilation and its resulting copyright are not used to limit the access or legal rights of the compilation’s users beyond what the individual works permit. Inclusion of a covered work in an aggregate does not cause this License to apply to the other parts of the aggregate.
Thanks. I’m trying to understand where you’re seeing the requirement to give attribution still.
I read this section as "if you use code from an AGPL project (PyLova in this case), then you need to:
a) have a dated commit on the project that is using it (PieFed)
b) keep the license the same
c) the entire project (PieFed) now falls under this license (it does)
d) have legal notices about it being AGPL, unless the original source (PieFed, then PyLova, then PieFed again) don’t have them.Then there’s a paragraph about aggregate projects and how the AGPL license doesn’t automatically spread to all parts of those projects.
So I’m still confused where it’s required to say “Mia was the author”. All it’s saying is “this is AGPL code – keep it AGPL and make the code available for others to see.”
You seem pretty sure of that, but I don’t see any of that in the actual AGPL license.
MrKaplan does seem like the most level headed person in this from the little bit that I’ve read, but that doesn’t make him the AGPL police.
On the topic of “should the comment have been deleted”, I still see it as BPR. The overall tone wasn’t in good faith, combined with previous beefs. You can’t be surprised that the comment was deleted.
BPR - I tried to look at this from both points of view. Both parties have had beef in the past, so tempers are going to be quick on both sides.
Rimu could have done things differently, but AGPL is AGPL. There’s no requirement to provide attribution unless the license is specifically modified. The PyLova license doesn’t add that requirement from what I can tell. The creator(s) of PyLova are getting a little too upset about this, so it’s a reasonable reaction to delete a comment that isn’t really made in good faith.
If they would like attribution in the code, why don’t they act like adults and reach out?
Just curious, but why not use Lemmy instead?
2·2 months agoAll-clad are great and they have factory sales from time to time. I don’t know the specs on thickness, but my 10" All-Clad is heavier than a vintage 10" cast iron pan (but lighter than a new Lodge).
They’re easy to keep clean. Anything baked on usually comes off with Barkeepers Friend, chain mail, or a combination of both.
Strands #887 “Struggling to find the words” 💡🔵💡🔵 💡🔵💡🔵 💡🟡I didn’t have to, but wanted to use a hint for every word because of the theme.
2·2 months agoOh, is this being released soon?
2·2 months agoYeah, my bad. Don’t know why I posted here!
deleted by creator
1·2 months agoI loved his character on The Sopranos.
That’s a Lemmy instance, right?
Would it help if there was more visibility on PieFed instances that show their individual settings?
If you’re willing to go back to Lemmy you probably weren’t interested in the ideological differences of PieFed, anyway.
I’ve played around with water twice, most recently within the past couple of weeks.
My house has well water which is very clear and refreshing, but relatively hard. We have a water softener, so what comes out of the tap has 0 hardness.
That doesn’t mean there’s nothing in it, just no calcium (or magnesium, I think).
My water is also pretty basic (high pH).
Soft, basic water can lead to boring coffee from what I’ve read.
Most recently I followed the instructions at Barista Hustle to make my own water using distilled water, baking soda, and epsom salt.
I’m loving the espressos I’m getting, so the next thing for me to do is switch back to my well water and see if gets noticeably worse.
To answer your question, though – it depends on your water.
Look for a water report from your municipality. If things are pretty reasonable, a filter may not change your coffee game.
I’ve heard that RO filters are the best type, but you may end up removing too much good stuff. In that case you can re-add your own minerals to taste.
1·2 months agoInteresting.
It makes sense to crowd source this type of thing, but I wonder if BW will do the right thing and share the database?
I use em dashes all the time but always with spaces, and the ones I use are fake. Just two regular dashes. I didn’t notice the lack of spaces – certainly a bit odd!
Edit: looks like my
--gets translated to an actual em dash in the web gui so that’s cool.
Just curious what clues you see that it’s AI text?
I ran it through two different detectors and one said 100%, and the other said 0%.
Poople #406 5/5 ⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜🟫 ⬜⬜⬜🟫 ⬜⬜🟫🟫 ⬜🟫🟫🟫 🟫🟫🟫🟫 https://poople.io/