There is no section 15 or 16 in GPLv3, but I did find section 7 saying:

Requiring preservation of specified reasonable legal notices or author attributions in that material or in the Appropriate Legal Notices displayed by works containing it; or

But that’s an optional thing that you must add onto the GPLv3 license. I’ll have to keep that in mind for the future.

That would explain why what I’ve read mentioned it’s not guaranteed in GPLv3 (when comparing to MIT). I’ll have to figure out what that notice would look like.

GPL has no requirements for author attribution which is contrary to the entire point of an MIT license.

That’s why I described it as joining the Borg. You release individualism and freely give it to the collective. That’s cool, and I get the ethos behind all that, but I don’t want to add any of those constraints to my code. I just don’t want credit for my work or the others to get lost. I don’t think it’s a hard ask.

Regardless, we ended up ultimately being a full replacement for the other project.

I don’t care if people make money to use my code. I just want my name attached to it somehow, even if you make it closed sourced which is MIT and OpenBSD. I hope you do use my code and even if you heavily reference it to make something new, carry that forward so more can learn and benefit.

I also don’t understand “better for the end user” arguments either. I have a library that people want to be included in another project, but that project is GPL. They won’t merge my code unless I change my code to be GPL. So everyone who wants them merged is out of luck. I can’t merge their code either with mine. What is supposed to happen is I freely give up my name to the code and restrict it to only being GPL and for GPL projects. Essentially, assimilate and join with the Borg. No, thanks.

And while that’s from my experience, I’ve also seen good projects get traction, have excitement over it, and fall off the earth because they end up making it GPL. Everyone interested in adopting it, personal or business, just disappear. Then something with less restrictions comes along and gets adopted.

End-users move to what’s better for them, and if you have a library that is only for GPL, you can end up limiting your options with a wasteful purity test. If you want it to be free you’d give freely with no restrictions. And if you think, “You can contact me to discuss licensing” that doesn’t happen. It’s still a restriction and almost nobody actually bothers.

The Who were kinda silly (eg: Boris the Spider) in their early years.

Judkins said that after the finger test, a lead cybertruck engineer at Tesla said he did the video wrong.

OP, can I get a tagged version of this so I can freely send it around while properly crediting your work?

I don’t know why you’re bringing up Palisade. The OP clearly says Telluride and the text mentions Kia. I have the same car, 2020.

You either have remote start over Kia Connect or key fob. It’s either, not both.

And a Reddit comment goes further:

No 2020 Tellurides in North America had remote start on the key fob from the factory.

https://www.reddit.com/r/KiaTelluride/comments/14737v9/telluride_remote_start/

See also: https://www.kiatelluride.org/threads/2020-telluride-remote-start.1825/ (outside of US has fob)

You can’t remote start with the key (at least on the 2020). It’s remote cellular start that runs on a ~40 second interval or nothing (or third party).

I have a Telluride. I’ve been downgraded to Lite which gives you notifications if you forget to lock your car. But remote start is no longer available.

The way it worked seems to be polling since you could wait around up to a minute for the car to perform a command.

The worst part is the car does not have “local” remote start. I’d have to buy another piece of equipment for that and install it. It’s not available at all on the key fob.

Definitely not.

I have to version check to workaround Chrome, FireFox and Safari bugs. Some things they fix and I can flag around version (eg: FF113 has buggy focus detection with Web Components), but some just have never been fixed (eg: Firefox does not support animated styles with CSS variables in Web Components).

That’s not to pick on FireFox. Chrome doesn’t support scrolling two elements simultaneously which breaks any type of fancy horizontal scrolling in horizontal tabs. Safari has some buggy implementation with ARIA tags for Web Components and [type=range] doesn’t follow spec for min.

If we were going to just not support new features because browsers are buggy, we’d never get any new features. It’s better to feature detect and that includes knowing what versions need workarounds.

it, appears to be a battery tester

Google did this for ChromeOS and I think it’s great. You get the old function with Alt+Search.

I think the market shifted from being pretty mainstream and crashing to become marketed specifically to kids. That age group still lives on and continues to be the main demographic.

early 2000s

dawn of the early web

As a 90s kid, I’m offended.

This doesn’t make any sense.

I have a toaster oven I use for small portions and my oven has an air fryer option.

Now you can work two jobs!

According to this random site with no sources the ranking is: Napster, Tidal, Apple, YouTube Music, Deezer, YouTube, Spotify, Pandora.

Should be a hyphen instead of period before NAHOM.

People actually use Arch, and it's that popular? TIL.

Double NAT with DMZ.

Those SIP ALGs are more trouble than they are worth. If you are using SIP devices, use a different outbound port on each device (eg: 5060, 5061, 5062).