Some of my old projects were GPL because I didn’t know AGPL existed. It’s not one of the default options on GitHub, i.e. the place where 90% of open source developers debut their journey
I’m trying hard to make Firefox my main browser on my phone. Out of habit, I browse in Private Mode and bookmark stuff I want to remember. Every so often though, Firefox closes the open private tabs when switch between apps. There is no real way to replicate this so I can submit a bug report. I’m not sure what I can do about it.
Good of them to bring the add ons though, I’ll keep persisting with the fox.
Yeah it sounds like Androids aggressive battery helper is causing this.
Is there any benefit to browsing private mode? Its only stopping history on your phone and not websites, so you can just set normal mode to not save history, cookies etc. Private mode is designed to be temporary in stopping your phone recording history and one button to close them all, so its not surprising that it doesn’t save tabs, in fact its a feature
In case you missed brewery’s message below (as it’s a second-level comment): all private mode does is to temporarily prevent storing history and cookies on your device. You can set that as default behavior for normal browsing instead.
No, I got that but like I said, it is just a force of habit for me to use private window during my web use. I need to use internet on multiple systems as part of my work and it’s just become natural for me to open a private session to search and do stuff and not to leave any login sessions open by mistake.
But I reading the replies makes me realise that it must be android’s aggressive battery saving tricks that kills Firefox active private sessions. But it is sad that I’m noticing this only for Firefox while Brave browser is exempt. Maybe because it is chromium based.
Android can terminate apps even if they still are in the recent app view. My Samsung is really aggressive in this regard with some apps, Firefox being one of them.
They might hope to make money at any point in the future. AGPL is too viral to integrate with. Working at a large corporation they’ve banned a standalone desktop tool we could have used because it was AGPL. We wanted to pay for it, but we couldn’t. It’s a dead end product for corporate users. So personal use , hobbyists, and those companies that think the AGPL won’t infect their IP or don’t care. You limit your TAM severely if you use AGPL.
So if you aren’t in it to ever make money in the future, go for it.
Is you release software that YOU OWN as AGPL, there is nothing stopping you from also licensing it as non AGPL, for a fee, in the future. I’m fact this is more possible with AGPL, since it disallows Tivoization.
If there’s a chance you want to make money off of it, AGPL is 1000x better than MIT. Once you release under MIT, a corporation can take it and do anything. If it’s AGPL a company can take it and do anything once they negotiate a license for it, and pay you for the privilege.
Unless it’s open source and you have any contributions without a rug pull contributor agreement. Also you don’t have any AGPL dependencies.
We had that relicense convo with the desktop tool maker and they were hogtied by both. Corporate policy dudes had to be harassed into even looking into it. Then maybe 3 months of back and forth championed by motivated tool users later they said to hell with it and banned it.
So if you plan for the AGPL rug pull for your contributors or you have no contributors and none of your dependencies are AGPL in a viral way, go ahead.
Your contributors must attribute copyright or agree to any reason license if you choose this. (This seems so obvious to me that I didn’t mention it)
But it’s still strictly superior to MIT licensing, which has the same requirement (since that’s part of copyright law, not party is the license itself), while still preventing commercial adoption under a different license.
I think we’re in violent agreement. The problem is you need someone in licensing/legal to take a risk at this point to even use AGPL on a corp machine. Figure out the law and the license, then make judgement calls on some slightly fuzzy parts. They’re just not going to do it. Maybe in a few years if someone tests “the right” model, whatever that is in court and prevails. Meaning the dev gets paid and the user retains intellectual property that is either tangential to the product or provides enough value to be it’s own product that’s still sellable in the same way as before the suit.
I may or may not care whether the code gets integrated into a proprietary network project, depending on the particular FOSS project. If it’s some general purpose command line widget, for instance, I would probably prefer not to restrict its usage in that context. If it were a long-running back-end online service project like MongoDB, though, that would be a different story, because that’s the kind of thing AGPL was created for.
GNU licenses aren’t about denying people from making money, they’re about ensuring that they share their code changes with everyone. AGPL was created to solve a new edge case concerning SaaS companies like AWS, Azure, Google, Alibaba, etc.
You make it sound as if corporations actually contribute a lot to open source projects they use. That is not the case in 99.9% of all cases where corporations decide to use some open source project.
If you are lucky as an open source maintainer you get a few patches from devs using their private email addresses to sneak the contribution around the legal department, but even that is rare. What you will see is random requests from company users to provide an SBOM for the entire project right now or bug reports asking to fix something right now.
So I seriously doubt you loose out when using AGPL or GPL.
Most of your examples are projects started by a company. The very few remaining are those 0.01% that got lucky.
My point stands: When you start an open source project, there is no need to worry about what companies might like or not. You will not get money from anyone.
To be clear, when I say “corporate support,” I don’t mean the company pays you.
I mean that the company pays someone (like an existing employee) to maintain their internal fork and contribute patches back upstream.
That’s how all of the projects I listed operate.
If you don’t care about interfacing with the industry like this, that’s totally fine, and the AGPL works. But if your goal is to write a piece of software that is used by the industry, then it can’t be AGPL without a strong and exceptional business model.
And I’m not trying to make a statement about whether you should write this kind of software. It’s only a statement about what to expect if you write this kind of software.
I mean that the company pays someone (like an existing employee) to maintain their internal fork and contribute patches back upstream.
Oh, most companies will pay someone to maintain an internal fork, but hardly any will contribute back. Sometimes that’s due to lazyness, sometimes it is the idea that nobody will care for the company internal stuff, but most of the time it is outright forbidden to share internal IP even when that comes in the form of patches to open source code.
In my experience it is safe to just ignore that case and not care about corporate convenience when starting any open source project.
I just bought an RX 6600. Far from their most powerful GPU, but it feels good being on Team Red again. Having an AMD processor with an Nvidia GPU made me feel dirty.
ink for google does look like it’s not made by google, so it may have a longer lifespan 👍 it seems to add material design elements to google pages, which is something google just didn’t have time for yet… 😵💫
Both DLSS and FSR are software leveraging the GPU to do the heavy lifting.
FSR is using HLSL shaders to do its thing whilst DLSS is using nvidia’s tensor cores to run an ML model.
Both solutions are great in different ways but I wouldn’t call FSR limited. If anything, Nvidias is the more limiting given it only works on specific hardware, is proprietary, and requires a lot more from developers to implement it vs FSR which is hardware agnostic and MIT licensed.
I would recommend the GrayJay apk, you can watch ad free YouTube, download videos, and playback in the background. It can be a bit buggy but still a better experience than youtube premium
I found Tasker speech to be pretty clunky, inaccurate and minimally supported. If it’s for personal use I have google recorder on a Pixel 7 with GrapheneOS and it’s STT is outstanding. It’ll download the offline engine and then you can kill it’s network and rip out google serices and it works fine (for now). Might be something to explore… If you find something good please reply, I’m thinking alon the same lines, but was just going to send the audio directly and do stt on the server. I know home assistant is planning voice command next year, might be something helpful there. You could also try using the Termux environment to spin up whatever linux engine you like.
opensource
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.