As a sidenote, I dislike it when a vendor makes me care whether something is a bug report, feature request, or support query prior to filing it. I'm willing to make an assessment on whether the query is of a public or private (if I'm unwilling to publish publicly, sensitive customer info, potential for vuln et c.) nature but beyond that I don't want to spend any time arguing about classification.

Megacorps seize the demand for regulation (to regulate them) in order to write regulation that purportedly does that, but in practice mostly closes the doors behind them and cementing their stranglehold on society. For Microsoft, Apple, and Google it's a small thing to agree to age verification if that means all the potential competitors will have to do so too.

The cheapest time to shut down a competitor is before they get to market.

That just seems too heavy an operation for my taste. Seems prone to either infighting or raising too much early capital.

Copyleft protects against that as a general rule. However some projects that rely on copyleft require contributors to sign license agreements granting the project owners a more permissive license.

It's a fun bit of Windows history trivia.

- https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20121218-00/?p=58... - https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20220106-00/?p=10...

What product is this referring to? I haven't heard about Adobe having any offering that is quite that expensive?

I find Tangled's language a bit annoying because I'm pretty sure if this caught on it's even more single word concept rather needlessly. If the protocol is called Knot, then call a server a Knot instance or Knot server. If the runner protocol is called Spindle, each server which responds to that could be a Spindle runner. That'll serve two functions: It'll let people contextually hook the terms up against existing terms and still retain the option of evolving into singular word concepts if they prove successful enough for that to happen.

From my point of view as a non-native speaker, the frequent overloading of commonplace words add to the confusion of learning English. I don't like that. It's far from a big hurdle, but just big enough to earn a soft little sigh from me.

Your comment was the only thing that made me even care to comment: Isn't it rather unlikely that the person you're commenting on takes issue with a kink rather than any other reason why "knot" and "spindle" might be poor choices? Who knows, they might even have a good reason, but you started out with assuming bad faith and at least I tend to just leave conversations at that point.

Writing down what you learn cements knowledge, and sharing what you write might help someone else.

You can still have a central team of operators. When they're expected to deploy and support applications from development or procurement teams, I'd argue that's something else than devops for better or worse.

Someone else considered it worthy of sharing here and enough people here found it interesting enough to get it to the front page. I don’t quite understand why, but it seems like it’s striking some sort of chord.

I may be way off, but to me it seems like the AI bubble is largely a way to siphon money from institutional investors to the tech industry (and try to get away with it by proxying the investments) based on a volatile and unpredictable promise?

Now I’m suddenly a third-class user, as I’m neither an enterprise customer nor paying for their AI features. I can only cross my fingers and hope the product doesn’t follow its new incentives. That doesn’t feel like a great position to be as a hobbyist who appreciated and paid for everything they released previously.

In that sense it could be reconstructed as ”soft power mode” and ”hard power mode” where the former inspires confidence and encourages creativity and the latter emphasizes compliance and alignment. Any person in a position of power will utilize strategies that could be seen as signs of either mode depending on the situation.

> If it exists, what are the barriers to adoption? Why don't we all use it?

My theory is that people in general don’t care that much, or (particularly in the case of corporations) consider permissive licenses to be ”freer” than copyleft.

the very first paragraphs on specifications.freedesktop.org says this:

> Freedesktop.org is a project to work on interoperability and shared base technology for free-software desktop environments for the X Window System (X11) and Wayland on Linux and other Unix-like operating systems. > We are not a formal standards body. The standards published on these pages are active or tentative (if marked as such) specifications which desktop environments may implement to improve mutual compatibility, share code and pool resources.

Deferring to XDG_CONFIG_HOME on MacOS if it exists makes a lot of sense as it conveys a clear intent from the user and the convention has grown popular. I’m not sure that the default ~/.config from the XDG specification is automatically better than ~/Library/Application Support by appeal to freedesktop.org’s authority.

And please don’t move configuration files around between releases without really being intentional about it.

Daniel Stenberg (from the curl project) has blogged a bunch about AI slop seeping into vulnerability reports[1], and if the same happens to code contributions, documentation and so forth that can help turning a fun hobby project into something you dread maintaing.

[1] https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2025/07/14/death-by-a-thousand-s...