přeposláno z: https://lemmy.ml/post/920408 > [Download](https://sourceforge.net/projects/distrohopper/files/latest/download) > > DistroHopper: Quickly download, create and run VM of any(TODO) operating system > > #distro #distrohop #distrohopper #linux #bsd #windows #iso #virt #virtualization #kvm #qemu #bash #script #github #codeberg #sourceforge #disroot #sourcehut #quickly #download #run #vm #arch #debian #devuan #ubuntu #fedora #gentoo #netboot #ventoy #garuda #macos #elementary #void #tails #zorin #windows > > Check [homepage](https://osowoso.github.io/DistroHopper/)

cross-posted from: https://szmer.info/post/298256 > And what do they blame? > > > a bug in an open source library > > Of course. Happy to build his product on open source code, happy to train his models on open source code, but as soon as shit hits the fan, he will push FLOSS under the bus without as much as a moment of consideration.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/893708 > It's kind of a strange mystery, started by looking for some gtk4 apps. > The last update for LlamaOS was around 2017, yet someone wanted to make a gtk4 file manager for it in 2022. > There are even some old sketches for a file manager, probably made before 2022 on https://llamaos.github.io/ > 

cross-postowane z: https://szmer.info/post/289222 > Git was designed as a decentralized version control system from the ground up. Yet it has been subverted by centralizing hosting and collaboration platforms that compete on projects hosting their code on them. Disagreements on where a project should be hosted regularly result in flame wars. But why, since we live in a world of federated services? If the Git hosters would federate, it might not matter on which server a merge request or an issue is filed. > > The #gitea issue targeted at adding #activitypub is still open, but it seems to require in-depth architectural changes. So what would be the best bet for a Git hosting platform to be the first in entering the #fediverse?

Pocket reposted an older QZ article about Leftpad and it's sort of reignited the controversy, at least for me. [Here's the link.](https://getpocket.com/explore/item/how-one-programmer-broke-the-internet-by-deleting-a-tiny-piece-of-code?utm_source=pocket-newtab) I'd love to hear what you think of this, but here are my thoughts: One, why is this not in the JS standard library? It's a *super commomly used* method with equivalents in every programming language, right? JS is pretty notorious for being bloated (which isn't necessarily a bad thing IMO), but the fact that it lacks this basic function is kind of ridiculous? Two, people were calling him out as the villain for having the *audacity* to delete a method he knows powers most of the internet, and to those people I ask: Have you even looked into why that happened? The most common story was just that he was butthurt because "NPM didn't treat him like royalty like he wanted", but, what actually happened was Kik, yes, the messaging platform notorious for being infested with child groomers, that Kik, wanted to publish their own library (I think it was an API for their app), and Koçulu already had a library called kik. So what does Kik do? Are they like any other programmer who would go "aw man, that name is taken, better come up with another name for my thing then!" No! They go to fucking NPM and essentially allege trademark violation (which is bullshit because Koçulu's kik was not a commercial product, and trademarks only apply to names used in commerce). But NPM still removes Koçulu's kik package, at which point Koçulu removed all his libraries and deletes his account in protest, and the rest is history. Long story short, it ends with NPM restoring his packages against his wishes, and as far as I know he never released anything on NPM again. So, generally I see two hiveminds when it comes to this controversy. One is of course people mocking Koçulu for being a snowflake or whatever, that he needs to control his anger and not withdraw his packages because he didn't get his way. Obviously, I disagree with that. I think Kik was being a snowflake for throwing a hissy fit that their name was already taken for something completely unrelated, by someone who almost certainly did not even use their app. They could have named their library kik-chat, kik-app, kik.com, whatever, and it still would have been the same library and people still would still have discovered it. NPM claims that they did this to "reduce confusion", but at best that is massively underestimating the intelligence of people who *already know how to program*, and is a complete lie cooked up by their PR team at worst. Needless to say, I don't think he was in the wrong at any point of this. The other hivemind was really mad at NPM, which is a step in the right direction, but they were mad that they restored his package. That makes no sense either, because one of the pillars of open source is that anyone can publish or distribute it as long as they distribute it with the original license and give credit. NPM is an asshole, but they still have the right to distribute an open source library. What we *should* be mad at NPM for is that they threw him under the bus by removing his package in the first place. Again, Kik has no legs to stand on and NPM was never in any legal trouble because of this, trademarks do not apply to non-commercial products. They're called *trade* marks. Trade. As in commerce. Also, it really highlights their priorities that they hold a corporation infamous for enabling children to be victimized in higher regard than someone making code used by the entire internet and not getting paid for it. I also don't see enough people being mad at Kik. What they did was absolutely unacceptable and they should have faced the brunt of the hate. Then again they've already shown themselves to be horrible so they probably would have shrugged it off or maybe even played into it for publicity. What can the open source world learn from this? Well, for one, I think it has become clear that having your open source dependencies managed by a for-profit company is bad. I wouldn't be surprised if Kik paid NPM a ton of money and essentially "bought" the kik name like a fucking NFT. The solution would be a combination of package repositories managed by worker co-op nonprofits with transparent financial reports, and decentralized/independent package sources hosted by the authors themselves. If JS took inspiration from Java just a bit more and also made their dependency naming system work by domains, we would have gotten `com.koculu.kik` and `com.kik.kik`, and no conflict. Almost like a federated package manager. Especially now that NPM is owned by Microsoft and Yarn was always owned by Facebook, we really do not have a good, trustworthy JS dependency repo, which is a problem because like the language or hate it, it is still extremely important for our modern computing environment. I think it's long overdue to break their duopoly. IDK, that's the end of my rant. Didn't really mean to write a wall of text, just saw this article and got me wanting a retrospective, but yeah. What do you think? Do you agree? Disagree? Why or why not?

Software has been a common thread across all of NASA's major achievements from the Moon landing to the deepest images of our Universe. Today, NASA relies on, releases, and contributes to Open Source Software to advance its scientific missions. From powering our databases monitoring our planet and Sun to running in our missions on other planets, Open Source Software is critical to addressing NASA's biggest challenges on climate change, exploring the solar system, and discovering life beyond Earth. The Ingenuity helicopter, exploring the surface of Mars, is guided by Open Source Software. The amazing images of the earliest galaxies from the James Webb Space Telescope were made possible by open source software developed openly and contributed back to the community. Now, NASA is taking the next steps to further broaden the impact of open source by applying it to the scientific process with its Open Source Science Initiative. NASA is directly supporting open source scientific software through grants and contributions. To further advance scientific reproducibility and reuse, the scientific software underlying future scientific results will be made openly available and unrestricted mission software will be developed openly to allow for community contributions.

Wow! (64)