Yes, if you use the "task list" block. You can also have checkbox bullet points but I don't use them, not really sure what the use-case for those are when you can just use the task list.
Someone who's in the business of stealing computers would just stick it in a faraday bag. I guess for an entire server you'd need a sizeable cage though.
Idk about Immich but Vaultwarden is just a Cargo project no? Cargo statically links crates by default but I think can be configured to do dynamic linking too. The Rust ecosystem seems to favour static linking in general just by convention.
I don't think it makes sense to list as something in common with the various groups called "tankie" when (at least until recently) it was rather orthogonal to whether or not anyone considered you a "tankie". But in any case it doesn't really matter.
I don't think it's fair to say that "anti-imperialism" was one of the requirements when many of the western ML/Stalinist groups that would generally fall under any anarchist's definition of "tankie" were very much chauvinist/nationalistic. Like that describes basically nearly every "communist party" in the west.
Obviously the modern anarchist usage of the term was fairly different to the origin of the term anyway, which meant a self-proclaimed communist who supported Soviet imperialism in Hungary, which Stalinists were/are opposed to. But I guess they re-used the term now that Khrushchevites are not really a thing anymore.
It was very bizarre seeing that change happen in real time. It was always a stupid word though, because even back when it was an anarchist term for a particular type of Marxist, the boundaries of what exact kinds of Marxists were encapsulated by it always changed from anarchist to anarchist. If you're actually talking politics and not memeing then you should say what exactly you mean.
No in the sense of back when anarchists used it to mean ML/Stalinist/AES types. No idea right now where the word seems to have no meaning. I don't think I've heard a definition of "tankie" that described my politics at least so probably still no. In general you should just say what you mean.
I don't think there is really any learning curve to "learning HTML" if you are not trying to do anything funky and you just want a simple static website that functions, like OP said, "like a business card". You may as well just type it out yourself. If you've never written HTML before just look at w3schools.
There was a movement to decriminalise women being topless (because it is actively criminalised in a lot of places). Unfortunately it's fallen off. It's particularly ridiculous because women are the ones who have an actual need to expose their breasts in public, ie some women need to breastfeed—no men need to.
Some people get turned on seeing topless men but it's not a sex crime for men to be shirtless in public. Free the nipple 2025
??? Arch Wiki is just plain html and css? You might be experiencing the ddos arch services have experienced lately. In any case I've not had any problems on Librewolf, although out of the websites you listed I only regularly visit the Arch Wiki and occasionally the PostmarketOS site.
"Stealing labour" is not the issue with capitalism, but in any case, using materials freely provided to the commons is not extraction of surplus labour.
We’re obviously talking about corporations intentionally using open source software with the intention of eliminating it as competition
That's not what corporations do when they use MIT/BSD code. They rely on that code; it's not their "competition". Unless you are talking about stuff like WhatsApp using libsignal, where they do use code from a direct competitor, but that's far less common, and also not going to have a negative effect on Signal. I can't speak for Signal of course but they are probably quite happy with WhatsApp using libsignal, as it both spreads Signal's beliefs about communication being E2EE, and it makes WhatsApp reliant upon Signal. FOSS projects like ffmpeg, curl, etc, are (reasonably!) happy that the entire industry depends on the tool they wrote. And they are kept alive because they are so widely depended upon. Corporations donate to FOSS projects because they need them.
we aren’t talking about the literal definition of the word “stealing”
wtf is a non-literal definition of "stealing"? The idea of stealing is stupid enough already, I can't play your games to figure out how you extrapolate something sillier from it. I'm a communist. I don't believe in private property and I don't give a shit about stealing.
You're arguing with a strawman you created, no one made any statements about the author.
The original comment called it stealing. There's nothing morally wrong with stealing, but regardless it's not even stealing. It's a stupid argument.
Solid justification for using it for coreutils you got there...
I'm obviously talking about not giving a shit about how people use it. Which makes sense for coreutils. Loads of people use it for loads of different purposes. The author shouldn't care how people use it.
I continue to fail to see the issue with the author, the person whose actual labour goes into the software, not your labour, deciding that they are fine with their source code being used in any way the general public sees fit provided they simply credit the author and provide a copy of the MIT licence. If I give you something, you're not stealing by accepting my gift. They're choosing voluntarily to make their source code available under such a licence. If they weren't okay with that, they would've chosen a copyleft licence.
And you’re dismissing their voice as irrelevant, but as the consumer of the product, their voice is most critical
That seems insanely entitled, but you're allowed to not use non-copyleft software if you really care that much. The authors of permissively licensed software aren't forcing you to use their software.
There are plenty of valid reasons to license a work as MIT or BSD or similar. Firstly, libraries are almost always going to be permissively licensed, not just because it allows proprietary software to use those libraries, but also because it allows permissively licensed FOSS to use those libraries. If I want to use a GPL library, it's not just that I have to make my software FOSS, it's that I have to make my software GPL specifically. If I want to make a FOSS MIT program, I can't use any GPL libraries.
Secondly, sometimes it's because, well, as the licence text provides, I don't give a shit what you do with the code. I write lots of little tools that are just for myself and I share them in case they're of use to someone else. If some big corpo uses it in their proprietary money-making machine it's no shit off my back. It was just a little tool I wrote for myself and it doesn't affect me if other people use it to make money.
I think GPL is reasonable if a lot of labour goes into a project, and you'd be discouraged from working on it if someone was leeching off of it for their proprietary software. But my MIT/BSD code requires 0 maintenance labour from me, and I don't care to control how other people use it. That's the whole point of MIT/BSD/Apache/etc. It's the "don't give a shit" licence.
Yes, if you use the "task list" block. You can also have checkbox bullet points but I don't use them, not really sure what the use-case for those are when you can just use the task list.