Coffee machines have had programmable auto-start at X time for decades at this point, no app or internet required, just a digital clock and simple, dumb electronics.

Ah darn, I didn’t know it was just an AI built site :(

Unfortunately, OpenMandriva’s president (warning, lunduke link as evidence) has declared the project “non-woke” and “anti-DEI”, which has resulted in it attracting a hard right community.

While BSD did get some help from the corps basing off it, ultimately it is a roll of the dice if they decide to contribute back, where as with GPL, it is enforced at a license level, and the newer AGPL license helps avoid the issue you describe with Netflix not being legally obligated to contribute back code that’s distributed under the normal GPL.

I personally think GPL/AGPL provides a better outcome for regular users, and empowers them to not be beholden to closed gardens and proprietary software, where as the BSD enables corporations to enshittify forks by legally allowing them to become closed and proprietary.

Also @Cris_Citrus@piefed.zip

The last time I investigated Solus, there seemed to be difficulty getting a new ISO out (which admittedly was quite a while ago). However your AI policy announcement even says to bear in mind Solus is a “small team” (I assume to justify the use of AI?).

Thanks for the info, I was going off stuff I’d read years ago, but I should’ve done more research to verify.

Looks like Mac OS is indeed still mostly a continuation of NextStep, though the original NextStep itself seems to have incorporated a decent amount from BSD. I was misinformed about the Switch, it looks like there was a fair amount of threads from a decade ago perpetuating that it ran on a BSD of some sort, and never came across the corrections. I edited my post to reflect that new info.

It’s an open source license that lets anyone take the code and relicense it under a proprietary license. That enables corporations to take the code, make it closed source, and profit from it without legally having to give anything back to the project that made the code in the first place (as an example, the PS3, PS4 and PS5 are all forks of BSD. And some parts of Mac OS and the Nintendo Switches take some parts from BSD. All of them were able to close source the code, making them proprietary).

Since they don’t have to contribute back to the original project, BSD itself didn’t benefit as much from all those corporations using it, despite the billions they made doing so, and all the users of those products were stuck with a closed source OS they couldn’t modify.

In comparison, Linux projects generally use the GPL license, which doesn’t allow anyone who forks the code to change the license to something other than GPL. That means if they distribute their forked version publicly, they are legally obligated to provide access to the source code to whomever requests it. So any beneficial changes they made can make it back upstream to the original project, as well as ensuring the end-users are never trapped in a closed ecosystem, since they can always fork it if a corporation goes rogue and enshittifies.

Solus mostly has just a skeleton crew left after the creater, Ikey Doherty, abandoned it suddenly. I personally didn’t think it’d be around long-term even before this new policy.

Deltachat has an extremely smooth on boarding process and is the same app for all platforms, but it cannot do voice calls or screen share (you can leave voice messages though).

Jabber/XMPP generally has a less smooth UX, and different apps across different platforms (except the Movim client, which is a web app that works on all platforms, but doesn’t do reliable notifications on mobile).

With the Movim client, Jabber/XMPP is basically a complete Discord and Signal replacement. It can do group video calls, screensharing with audio (only with chromium based browser for now), as well as voice and text channels under different servers.

Regarding metadata, you may want to read the FAQ.

It will have forward secrecy after they finish implementing Autocrypt2.

A person also has to determine their security threat level. If they think a state actor may take a personal interest in them, then they’re probably best using in-person offline communication. If they must communicate online, then IMHO I don’t think Signal is a good choice due to it being centralized (everything goes through their servers, and they are a single entity making them easier to infiltrate or coerce by governments) and requiring you to link a personally identifying number or credit card.

If they just don’t want a corporation datamining them to sell to advertisers, Deltachat is more than good enough.

Deltachat and Jabber, both decentralized encrypted messaging apps (as opposed to Signal, which is centralized), don’t even require an email to create an account, let alone a phone number or payment.

Hacker news generally flags and shuts down posts critical of tech bros, capitalism, or the right wing.

Lobste.rs is a better alternative to HN.

+1 to banning AI projects.

That’s awesome! I hope she finds those sources helpful, I’ve been nabbing em from all around the threadiverse for a while now :)

No worries noc, I meant it in a playful way, thought it’d be funny since I missed that one too :p

While we are at it… CEOs as well.

Quite right, thanks for pointing that out.

I’d personally strongly advocate for outright not allowing AI made apps to be posted, for these reasons:

1. Simply using an AI that’s run on a corporate data centers encourages the construction of yet more data centers, with all of the environmental/climate negatives they bring, as well as local harms they induce on the people living near them, such as increased electricity rates.

2. Using corporate AI directly helps the financial situations of those giant corporations (by boosting usage/user numbers, they are able to attract more investment capital), most of which are ran by right-wing CEOs who are more than willing to collaborate with and fund fascist governments to ensure that they are not regulated in search of both maximum profits. Some of these companies, such as Nvidia, Palantir and Oracle, genuinely appear to be seeking to use these tools for what would previously be considered crackpot conspiracy theory levels of public control and surveillance.

3. I’m wary of the potential effects of AI usage resulting in declining or stagnating critical thinking based on some preliminary studies (example 1, example 2).

4. I do not think LLMs can be “just a tool” as many claim.

5. 99% of LLMs (the ones virtually everyone use) are trained on copyrighted code that is incompatible with GPL licensed projects. LLMs have a 3 to 10% chance to unknowingly reproduce the copyrighted code perfectly, introducing legal plagiarism into an open-source project, which could easily open up the developers to being sued in the future if companies scanned open source repos for copyright violations.

6. Many courts are ruling that LLM generated code cannot be copyrighted at all, meaning that it also cannot be legally made GPL, losing the protections from corporate exploration the GPL normally grants. https://fsfe.org/news/2026/news-20260825-01.html

No prob! :)

I have a pretty dim view of using LLMs, especially in FLOSS, for practical and ethical reasons.

1. Simply using an AI that’s run on a corporate data centers encourages the construction of yet more data centers, with all of the environmental/climate negatives they bring, as well as local harms they induce on the people living near them, such as increased electricity rates.

2. Using corporate AI directly helps the financial situations of those giant corporations (by boosting usage/user numbers, they are able to attract more investment capital), most of which are ran by right-wing CEO’s who are more than willing to collaborate with and fund fascist governments to ensure that they are not regulated in search of both maximum profits. Some of these companies, such as Nvidia, Palantir and Oracle, genuinely appear to be seeking to use these tools for what would previously be considered crackpot conspiracy theory levels of public control and surveillance.

3. I’m wary of the potential effects of AI usage resulting in declining or stagnating critical thinking based on some preliminary studies (example 1, example 2).

4. I do not think LLM’s can be “just a tool” as many claim.

5. 99% of LLM’s (the ones virtually everyone use) are trained on copyrighted code that is incompatible with GPL licensed projects. LLM’s have a 3 to 10% chance to unknowingly reproduce the copyrighted code perfectly, introducing legal plagiarism into an open-source project, which could easily open up the developers to being sued in the future if companies scanned open source repos for copyright violations.

6. Many courts are ruling that LLM generated code cannot be copyrighted at all, meaning that it also cannot be legally made GPL, losing the protections from corporate exploration the GPL normally grants. https://fsfe.org/news/2026/news-20260825-01.html