What would it mean for you to call it yourself? This change is just so that if you press Ctrl+. in Firefox, the native emoji picker shows up, so at least in that sense you're invoking it yourself? (Before this change, Ctrl+. would do nothing in Firefox, even though it would show the emoji picker in normal GTK applications.)
I downvote every comment that's accusing something of being AI. Either it's true, in which case the comment doesn't change anything, or it's false, in which case it's hurtful. The upside is not worth the downside.
I want it to become a norm that accusing something of being AI is considered rude.
They have some functionality for which you can login, and only at login are you asked to agree to the terms. Presumably you can just use the offline functionality of the editor just fine without agreeing to anything other than the AGPL.
That's all true except for that last paragraph - the rights and conditions they gave you to existing code are irrevocable, so you'll continue to be able to use the last open source version indefinitely, including the feature you made yourself. It's just that they can release new versions and not publish the source code of their additions, even if that new release also includes a feature you made yourself.
Well, good to know we weren't the only ones with the racist names (feels like ages ago, but it wasn't even that long ago). Schaumkuss makes sense though, they just changed them to the Dutch equivalent of "kuss" here.
Haha, don't worry, I get that perspective. I was actually trying to do the opposite - I feel like the perspective you outline is the default one people will usually take, so I wanted to change that :P I think this article does a good job of that too: just because they're not perfect, doesn't mean someone actively doing some good deserves negative attention, when we don't give that same treatment to others who do less good.
That said, I'm not arguing that we should "be treating FUTO as a beacon of OSS support". I do actually agree with all of this:
What we should be doing is acknowledging that they did give a small one time donation to various projects, but also recognising that it was for self-serving reasons. I’m sure theres individuals who have given more than 1000 in single payments to these projects, or less but more consistently (monthly, every 6 months, every year, etc). What makes FUTO more of a supporter than those individuals?
If it wasn't for this article, I wouldn't actually be talking about FUTO. (Except in the context of Immich, where they actually are the main reason the project's doing well.) So I don't feel like we need to start negatively discussing them just because they're not perfect.
And don't worry about the downvotes, I don't actually care about them.
Yeah I read the article. Still, musl libc received $1000, the advertising didn't sell anything, and it got corrected after it got pointed out. One of the founders maybe did associate themselves with someone whose views I might not like, but I feel like if their main goal was to promote that person, there would've been more efficient ways to use that money to do so that would not resolve in musl libc receiving $1000, or in a project like Immich being viable.
I don't think that comparison is entirely fair, but I do think that homeless person having 1 euro is still better than that person not having 1 euro. Especially if instead of 1 euro, they actually gave the homeless donation equivalent of keeping a project like Immich viable.
I'd also keep in mind that there are other rich person not giving 1 euro to a homeless person, and so while I have my reservations about rich people in general, I wouldn't necessarily single out the one that gave the euro.
What would it mean for you to call it yourself? This change is just so that if you press Ctrl+. in Firefox, the native emoji picker shows up, so at least in that sense you're invoking it yourself? (Before this change, Ctrl+. would do nothing in Firefox, even though it would show the emoji picker in normal GTK applications.)