- ship or maintain a modified version outside the contribution-purpose
  rules;
- maintain a divergent private or internal fork;
- port, clone, rebrand, or recreate the Covered Software;
- create an API-compatible replacement, behavioral clone, competing
  implementation, or Derivative Implementation; 

At that point why bother making your codebase public?

Can confirm. Run OpenSUSE and my neckfolds run for days.

He wrote a good book decades ago and has slowly rotted his brain since.

Or just disable limiting rules because they don’t wanna fuck with them. That one is my favorite to try to fight in PRs

Clearly they don’t find it useful.

What’s wrong with it? Honestly it’s kinda refreshing.

My favorite is seeking feedback on reviews on stuff we own and people not responding and being like “I’m sorry I had Claude create 500+ PRs I can’t possibly respond to everything”

You don’t think there’s a problem with that!?!?

And anytime they try to rectify people balk at the price increase and drop.

It’s not the critical lynchpin of work that they were hoping they could charge stupid money for.

sudo zypper dup 

Oh no it’s a whole review…

My company is unironically rolling this out without any hint of why this could be a bad idea.

Actually the dishes you are talking about aren’t dishes at all.

If you want I can go through options to replace these items with actual dishes.

“Here’s my Claude skill that takes the LLM 20 minutes with constant babying that saves a human 1 minute of work”

Promo time baby!

Maybe next time don’t ship your source maps if you care so much?

LMAO 1 nine of reliability.

It’s like all companies forgot that reliability is a core feature…

It’ll still catch the bots that randomly throw out that part of the prompt.

Prompts aren’t a guarantee.

I don’t know if requiring an S3 bucket really fits the self-hosting ethos

https://docs.gryt.chat/docs/server#environment-variables

"(1) Provide an accessible interface at account setup that requires an account holder to indicate the birth date, age, or both, of the user of that device for the purpose of providing a signal regarding the user’s age bracket to applications available in a covered application store.

Sounds like it’s a text box that enter input into. Making it completely pointless.

In essence, while the bill doesn’t seem to require the most egregious forms of age verification (face scans or similar), it does require OS providers to collect age verification of some form at the account/user creation stage—and to be able to pass a segmented version of that information to outside developers upon request.

So you just fake a date and call it a day… thank you Cali…

For real though I can’t imagine the sysadmin and docker nightmares that arise from having to completely overhaul your account orchestration scripts to input a garbage birthday.

I don’t think anyone thought of the fact that an account on an OS doesn’t always correspond to a human.