#dev 2026-07-29

2026-07-29 UTC
[artlung], deathcomestotime, [tantek]2, grufwub, ZodiacalComet, [0x3b0b], [0x3b0b]_, d1s1nf3ct, gothbarkeep, [TarCoon_CarToo], Xe, [Trevor_Morris], [pcarrier], barnaby and doesnm_ joined the channel
#
[Trevor_Morris]
A couple of years ago I analysed the links on my blog, it's not nice reading, with a third of links broken - https://www.trovster.com/blog/2024/01/the-loss-of-links-continues I've also written a few posts about digital preservation, for my university and personal projects - https://www.trovster.com/blog/2023/02/digital-preservation-how-to
d1s1nf3ct and oodani joined the channel
#
[tantek]
trovster++
#
Loqi
trovster has 1 karma in this channel over the last year (2 in all channels)
ttybitnik, mars, [snarfed], tuft, shoesNsocks, ax562 and WinnerWind joined the channel
#
WinnerWind
[tantek]: thank you! i stopped using GitHub but my repos are still public, so I went ahead and toggled that off.
#
WinnerWind
my repos are multiple months out of date in GH now ^_^
#
WinnerWind
Wild that they have a form to get rid of yourself from the dataset but didnt think of asking the owners. ironic because one of my repos is under a All Rights Reserved license
#
WinnerWind
LMAO! the project with the All Rights Reserved license did make it in to The Stack
#
[capjamesg]
I filed the form to remove my repositories too.
#
WinnerWind
if our repos can be scraped like this, i wonder how many AI companies have already done so, without an opt out form or even without your consent
#
[snarfed]
just like the web
#
aaronpk
I mean, I have always published my code on GitHub with a permissive license, I don't see why this is something special. If I didn't want people to do things with it I wouldn't have published it publicly
#
gRegor
I may not mind much for my personal code, though I object on principle to the bulk ingesting of code, ignoring licenses, for the sake of the plagiarism machine.
#
WinnerWind
yeah, ignoring licenses have to be the worst part. I dont mind if they scraped GPL protected projects (those explicitly give the reader freedom to do anything), but when it clearly and blatantly ignores a very specific All Rights Reserved license, that becomes a problem. I'm not a lawyer, but going off what Choose A License says, a project with no license is exclusive copyright (not legal advice) (https://choosealicense.com/no-permission/
[Sophia] joined the channel
[aciccarello] and ax562 joined the channel
#
[tantek]
I think it's more of a spectrum, having worked and published across a variety of licenses, for various reasons. Give up *some* control would be more accurate IMO
#
[snarfed]
yup, that's the second sentence there: "You can choose how much to give up, based on the license, but you pretty much always end up with less control than if you kept it closed source."
#
[tantek]
"Pretty much" is right. There are open source licenses that don't permit re-use (read only) e.g. what we did with OpenDoc in the early 1990s
#
[snarfed]
hah yes! still less control, ie arbitrary external people can see the code, when they can't if it's closed source, but yeah it's a big spectrum
#
[tantek]
yeah, perhaps marginally less control via less security through obscurity but that's about it 🙂
[Jo], [Al_Abut] and barnaby joined the channel
#
Loqi
[preview] [mrgluek] deltachat_publish: Delta Chat bot for mobile publishing of posts and image assets to Astro blogs (IndieWeb / POSSE) via single-commit Forgejo REST API.
#
gRegor
Is this the Delta chat that refers to? https://delta.chat/en/
#
gRegor
What is Delta Chat?
#
Loqi
It looks like we don't have a page for "Delta Chat" yet. Would you like to create it? (Or just say "Delta Chat is ____", a sentence describing the term)
ben, kensanata, ttybitnik and rossabaker joined the channel
#
[Sophia]
I am working on making my site work offline with service workers for the interactive stuff. Any advice?
#
[tantek]
Oooh depends on how much interactive stuff! Like are you persisting user data or merely things like animations / games?