Microblog
in reply to @ 2015-324.699ZI would simply charge people for using the service if they felt it will be useful to them
This model is still perfectly acceptable for freedom-respecting software
in reply to @ 2015-324.576Zi.MX6 systems like the Hummingboard aren't even listed
in reply to @ 2015-324.068Znitrokey
in reply to @ 2015-324.030Zffmpeg will do pretty much anything to anything 🙂
in reply to @ 2015-323.979ZThe author seems completely disconnected from the average museum visitor. If the photos do not harm the content and visitors find they enhance their experience, then what is the problem? That you personally dislike their photos? No one is making you look at their photos.
in reply to @ 2015-323.854ZFrom
https://d.wifo.org/t/places-to-find-commons-news-and-new-works-projects/162:
in reply to @ 2015-321.777Z
The constraints for Monad code using fail become (Monad m, ApplicativeFail m) => instead of the simpler MonadFail m =>. If we expect the common use of fail to be in Monad — not Applicative — do-notation, this leaves us with more verbose constraints.Why is this a problem? Having multiple constraints when using multiple features is a normal and useful feature of Haskell.
in reply to @ 2015-321.773ZIf I have
MonadFailandApplicativedefined and use ApplicativeDo, will it use myfaileven if my context is notMonad?
in reply to @ 2015-320.565ZWe shouldn't.
in reply to @ 2015-319.893ZI doubt it violates NC (though NC is legally murky and dubious garbage), but it almost definitely violates ND. However, if it's just for personal use probably no one cares. If you get permission from the creator then it doesn't matter what the license is.
in reply to @ 2015-319.771Zif you have a license, then of course. but you cannot give others permission to reuse that image and you need to make it very clear that it's not covered under your cc license.
in reply to @ 2015-319.582ZFSF also objects to the documentation of many debian packages mentioning nonfree things.
in reply to @ 2015-319.579ZI don't disagree with you, but I don't at all see how ZaReason and Purism are different. Both just use available hardware that is as close to compatibility as they can get.
in reply to @ 2015-319.575ZWhile dual-boot encryption support might be handy to some users, I think "most" being dual-boot is very citation needed