Apparently, 12% of Technology Workers Believe that MacOS is based on Linux
-
No it's not, it's based on BSD, or more specifically Darwin, which is derived from BSD, so Unix-like, but not Linux.
Although, oddly, macOS is a certified UNIX OS so it can rightfully sit at the table with the SysV distros, but it's completely removed in its nature from the SysV distros.
Not just Unix-like but actually ancestrally Unix as well as being certified as Unix
-
It has been since 2019 but before that it was bash.
I just got around to switching last month
-
For one, some of the coreutils are weird. They aren't BSD coreutils, but they're not GNU coreutils either. They're like an old version of BSD coreutils with some GNU features added.
I didn't know that. When I was searching for a new computer last month, I considered a Macbook because I liked BSD utilities more. I ended up buying a Thinkpad T14 and booting Chimera Linux(actually uses BSD utilities) on it.
-
Oh it's infamous racist Bryan Lunduke. Is there no rule against posting that guy?
Oh? What did he do
-
It is now, but it was
bashbefore.But in any case once you start doing anything remotely advanced you’ll find the individual command line utilities are wildly different between macOS and Linux. They seem (are?) much closer to FreeBSD than GNU utilities.
Yeah, it's always fun to find out that a standard looking util on osx actually requires weird args and syntax.
-
That license does nothing.
It makes me feel good. That's something.
~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~
Can't argue with that. I'm glad you've found something that you enjoy.
-
Yeah, it's always fun to find out that a standard looking util on osx actually requires weird args and syntax.
I’m mostly used to it now. Though
-ris supported in macOS’rmcommand I still prefer-Rand use it even on Linux where I believe-ris the preferred argument. -
I don’t think it’s equivalent to sovereign citizens. OP is the author of their comment and therefore has the copyrights. As the author one can license their work as all rights reserved or other permissive licenses.
OP chooses to license their work as Creative Commons.
They’re not forcing you to accept the license, it’s your local government that enforces copyright.
The reason why this might work on Lemmy but not on corporate Social media is that corporate social media often have terms of service that require you to give them ownership/rights/etc. Lemmy has no such ToC.
The reason why this might work on Lemmy but not on corporate Social media is that corporate social media often have terms of service that require you to give them ownership/rights/etc. Lemmy has no such ToC.
Actually, safe harbor laws would encompass social media sites as well, so it would work there as well.
Either corporations own the content you post and are responsible for it, or they just host your content you post that you own and are immune from harm for the content. The law is currently the latter, and not the former.
~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~
-
Can't argue with that. I'm glad you've found something that you enjoy.
Well, I'd enjoy it more if people stopped bothering me about using a license for my content, than I do actually using a license for my content.
~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~
-
I love the idea of licensing comments XD
The return of the forum signatures, whether you like it or not.
Mines going to be an ad from NordVPN and maybe Apex Legends? I wonder what's their rate like?
️ -
That license does nothing.
It makes me feel good. That's something.
~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~
Do you spend a lot of time arguing with people over it?
-
Do you spend a lot of time arguing with people over it?
Do you spend a lot of time arguing with people over it?
Allot more than I wish, I really try not to. Even today, I keep asking people to not rehash it, and lets just talk about the topic my comment was posted in. But for some strange reason people just won't let it go, and push to talk about it.
~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~
-
Oh? What did he do
I don't have a list of specific instances on hand. But he was kind of a contrarian voice for a while that I listened to over a decade ago, but in 2016 went in the more anti-woke (anti-CRT in terms of the time) and very reactionary culture war turn.
-
Thanks, appreciate the support!
It's amazing how bent out of shape some people get about this, both currently, as well as about tenish months ago when I last was on Lemmy (check out my comment history from that time period if you really want to get annoyed).
I got to imagine that its people who want to farm the comments for their LLMs training, that are trying to prevent the popular usage of people licensing their content.
~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~
And I'm assuming just having "all content licesed under the CC BY-NC-SA 4.0" in your bio wouldn't work?
-
And I'm assuming just having "all content licesed under the CC BY-NC-SA 4.0" in your bio wouldn't work?
And I’m assuming just having “all content licesed under the CC BY-NC-SA 4.0” in your bio wouldn’t work?
I'm not sure if I understand your question.
I believe it does work. Or at least it should, and I shouldn't give up my right to license my own content just because enforcement of laws is lax.
~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~
-
And I’m assuming just having “all content licesed under the CC BY-NC-SA 4.0” in your bio wouldn’t work?
I'm not sure if I understand your question.
I believe it does work. Or at least it should, and I shouldn't give up my right to license my own content just because enforcement of laws is lax.
~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~
Well, scrapers probably would ignore it.
-
I don't think just thanking someone is real content. /shrug
But answering someone who thinks they are being funny or annoying, by explaining things to them, would be considered content by me.
~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~
-
This post did not contain any content.
I remember a podcast I used to listen to a long time ago that argued that MS should just make a fork of the Linux kernel and just make the gui work like Windows. Better security and stability, and huge increase in user base with all the normal Linux users seeing it as viable alternative. I thought it was a brilliant idea. Well except Microsoft would likely have figured a way to kill Linux from the inside.
-
This post did not contain any content.
If it's not POSIX, it's POS
-
Oh it's infamous racist Bryan Lunduke. Is there no rule against posting that guy?
I see no racism in the video posted?
