I dont know what that means. Do the oauth creds get shared with a third party or no?

The point is that most of these solutions require me letting an app post on my behalf. I don’t want that.

You have to remove the Sim card. Use WiFi.

You can’t have privacy if your phone connects to cell towers. Your Mac address can be randomized. Your IMEI can’t

Doge? No.

You dont even zcash?

There’s a few privacy coins

Check the exchanges sections of monerica and kycnotme

https://monerica.com/ https://kycnot.me/

How does auth work?

Do I have to grant a third party permission to post to my account? Or do I have it auth with my credentials locally?

And interstate bus companies!

Link?

It helps to download content (like YouTube videos for PeerTube instances) when you’re rate limited

It helps with spam campaigns.

I’m surprised YouTube still lets you list your PeerTube channel in your YouTube channel description.

I try to drive all my YT traffic straight to PT

Reminds me of when the NSA was spying on Yahoo Video calls so they could do their early facial recognition training.

Since it was a platform mostly used for video sex, The NSA literally made a public statement saying they had a system to blur genitals and that they were “only” training facial recognition data.

My mind was fucking blown. Who cares if you film my dick? That doesn’t let you identity me from the MacDonald’s cameras you hacked into. The face data is what we were worried about.

It means that any company can take that code, modify it (as would be required every year per IRS tax changes), and resell it without being required to publish the source code changes.

What many European countries are doing is requiring the government to publish code under a copyleft license. That would allow companies to also benefit from this code to make their own tools (which they could also sell), and it would require them to publish the source code of their improvements.

Basically copyleft legally ensures collaboration. Public domain does not.

That was before copyleft was a thing. Many European governments are now requiring tax funded software to be copyleft.

There are exceptions to that law, such as the USPS. Sounds like we need to contact our legislators to get the law updated

Licensing CC0 is just subsidizing corporations at the expense of tax payers. It should be copyleft because it was funded publicly

It means that any company can take that code, modify it (as would be required every year per IRS tax changes), and resell it without being required to publish the source code changes.

What many European countries are doing is requiring the government to publish code under a copyleft license. That would allow companies to also benefit from this code to make their own tools (which they could also sell), and it would require them to publish the source code of their improvements.

Basically copyleft legally ensures collaboration. Public domain does not.

Nah, that law was written before copyleft licenses were widespread. There are exemptions for contractors and some groups like USPS.

I’m saying that law is wrong, and it needs to be changed.

It means that any company can take that code, modify it (as would be required every year per IRS tax changes), and resell it without being required to publish the source code changes.

What many European countries are doing is requiring the government to publish code under a copyleft license. That would allow companies to also benefit from this code to make their own tools (which they could also sell), and it would require them to publish the source code of their improvements.

Basically copyleft legally ensures collaboration. Public domain does not.

CC0 = gift to corporations at the expense of taxpayers

Copyleft = everyone owns it and all derivatives, even from corporations

It means that any company can take that code, modify it (as would be required every year per IRS tax changes), and resell it without being required to publish the source code changes.

What many European countries are doing is requiring the government to publish code under a copyleft license. That would allow companies to also benefit from this code to make their own tools (which they could also sell), and it would require them to publish the source code of their improvements.

Basically copyleft legally ensures collaboration. Public domain does not.

A copyleft would absolutely be appropriate here.

It was paid for with public funds.