I think you’re right that the former license can’t be taken away from other instances.

Some projects chooses a license specifically to stop people taking code without sharing code back upon redistribution via copyleft (ShareAlike). Getting around that by changing the license defeats the purpose (projecting users software freedom).

There are some advantages but generally it’s better for everyone to keep their copyright to prevent a company being able to take over and then deny users the software freedoms intended by the original license.

That’s better, but is it simpler?

If the machines are in the same building a USB stick is the simplest option :D

Some value software freedom more than performance, and the open source Nouveau Nvidia driver isn’t quite there yet on performance.

The only PC fan manufacture that has not gone RGB at all is a Noctua (premium). Their fans are poop brown and beige or black for consumer, grey for industrial, but are great in terms of noise to cool performance. If noise is important then there’s videos of people comparing fans so you can pick a tone that is subjectively best.

I enjoyed the days of one color LEDS. Couldn’t beat a Tron blue or The Matrix green.

The responsiveness between a hard drive and an SSD is night and day. NVMe is even faster but not noticeable unless you move a hell of a lot of data around. A motherboard having at least 1 M.2 NVMe slot is common, so installing the OS on it is an option. Hard drives have more storage per price, but unless space is significant factor I suggest using SSDs (also quieter than a spinning disk!). More info on storage formats in this video

Recent generations of motherboards use DDR5 RAM, which were very expensive on release. I think the price has come down but I am not up to date this generation. You may be able to save money making a DDR4 system but you’ll be stuck on a less supported platform.

AMD had like ~10 years of bad/power hungry processors and Intel stagnated, re-releasing 4-core processors over and over. AMD made a big comeback with their Ryzen series becoming best bang for buck, then even over taking Intel. I think it’s pretty even now.

If you don’t intend to game or do certain compute workloads then you can avoid buying a GPU. Integrated CPUs have come quite far (still low end compared to a dedicated GPU). Crypto mining, Covid and now AI has made the GPUs market expensive and boring. Nvidia has more higher-end cards, mid range is way more expensive for both and low end sucks ass. On Linux AMD GPUs drivers come with the OS, but Nvidia you have to get their proprietary drivers (Linux gaming has come a long way).

It’s harder for regular folk to move and they may not (yet) have an issue with what we may see, but regular folk would tolerate anything and tolerate it forever? They just have a different line which companies cannot cross.

I think (and admittedly, I hope) every proprietary software is destined to shit the bed due to the irresistible temptation to make the user’s experience worse for increased profit. If there’s no alternative then users have no choice but luckily many of us will even create useful software just as a passion. You may be right that we just have not created software aimed at them because it’s other tech people who give feedback/contribute.

It needs to be a big wave of migration, rather than convincing one individual at a time. Discord needs to shit the bed while there’s a tolerable/better alternative we can all agree on.

Is it worth the risk to just stop having a Discord. Users that strongly care will use something else?

You should be allowed to modify your own hardware. Bowser does not “owe” Nintendo, they and the law gave him an offer he can’t refuse.

Did ChatGPT write that? Sounds like something from an theist vs atheist thread.

When you know the goal but do not know how to functionally get there then an artificial neural network can be useful. To get Chinese Go artificial opponent working was done by making the program run many games against many iterations of itself to adjust itself towards the correct moves for any situation. The biggest difference is the scope of problems this type of tool is capable of solving.

Technology creating more jobs in the industrial revolution isn’t a valid argument that automating intelligence will create more jobs. Even if we grant that it does, are you assuming that it will create more jobs that it nullifies forever? If we can agree there’s a point where it stops being positive then we just disagree on the time it will happen.

If we assume jobs are created and they too complex to be suitable for the majority of people (who mostly work in transport) then we have the same societal problem: job available, apply within (humans need not apply). If we’re to take the industrial revolution as gospel then most people leave the workforce when the jobs are automated.

Humans were the best chess players until computers brute forced the solution with uninteligent computational power. Humans were the best at Chinese Go for longer as brute forcing would take too long. Humans were no longer the best at Go when machine learning beat pros consistently. This is one-way, hunans don’t win back ground. If we assume AI doesn’t get better than this saying “technology does not reduce unemployment” is still short sighted.

The alignment problem should be taken seriously even if wealthy assholes agree, but AI killing humans is a seperate issue.

There’s no new jobs for horses after the combustion engine was invented to do physical labor - why would there be more “intelligence jobs” for humans when intelligence is automated? If it’s a pertinent question then such people have not questioned their wishful thinking.

AI today doesn’t need to affect all jobs to cause mass disruptions. The biggest industry is transport - what jobs does MIT’s president imagine will be created for 60 year old truckers if they’re replaced with autos? Do we get the funny joke where people suggest truckers should learn programming?

What services use the graphics card and are fine with the low end?

The tldr is some portion of pregnant women get a condition which makes their heart look like it needs to be shocked by the pacemakers defibrillator. This has not been accounted for in part because most women who get pacemakers defibrillator are elderly and so won’t get pregnant. Besides that, testing devices on pregnant people isn’t a thing (for good reason).

I don’t use TikTok, do creators buy music fron TikTok to put in videos?

Karen Sandler of the Software Freedom Conservancy has a “pacemaker defibrillator” for her large heart, and has done a few talks about it. I just read that a defibrillator is not usually included as part of “pacemaker” so I may have misspoke.

Original talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XDTQLa3NjE

Follow-up talk 6 years later: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2FNqXhr4c8

There are pacemakers with bugs shocking hearts incorrectly and companies can’t help. They’re bust or don’t have the copyright to the code or just won’t help - buy our new product next year.

It’s not difficult to imagine malicious brain implants when the users are not in control. Being open source, or rather “free software”, is equally a main issue.