Kühn noted that the SFC is now able to hire a full-time litigation attorney

Great to hear! that’s not really enough to take take on large corporate offenders though, donate if you can!

it depends a lot on how you are using them tools wise. as a sharding database for document storage they are nearly equivalent. when it comes to ecosystem opensearch’s is smaller and a bit more specialized but very open. elasticsearch has a lot more fancy enterprise tooling and tools but can be annoying to work with unless you have a full license for all the features. it’s better to ask what is your use case/expectations and choose based on that.

https://github.com/ziglang/zig/pull/24983 https://github.com/ziglang/zig/pull/25687 https://github.com/ziglang/zig/pull/25974 https://codeberg.org/ziglang/zig/pulls/31154 read these a while ago in a different forum site. I think you are misreading/misinterpreting what I objected to. I said “like a bit of revisionism/justifying previous actions with a more palatable excuse other than fuck AI.” if this was too abstract, let me put it this way, no where in the coc or wiki or anywhere did they try and make this about growing a community or vetting contributors until recently. it was per that wiki not at all like that and easy to miss. my issue is not with banning ai contributions. it is with what i see as trying to change the tone to something palatable/reasonable after the fact. also i’ve tried to keep this free of personal attacks against you or anyone else. I don’t think i’m going to continue this. I made what i felt was a pretty mild critique based on a conversation i had on a different forum explained my critique, was then told go get a list of incidents which missed my point entirely of the whole changing narrative bit which was then partially acknowleged as “less professional” but “totally unambiguous”. obviously this isn’t about engaging on what my critique was, just winning arguments. I’ll save you the trouble. you win!

https://github.com/ziglang/zig/wiki/Writing-Issues-with-Copilot-and-Other-LLMs/_compare/d6b94cb2bf77fe7f30687fe3ffec68878e75c650 That was the code of conduct up until 3 weeks ago also look at slop or just ai.

Like I said look at the PR’s and the way they are closed off. there were no explanations of this policy then just a “Fuck AI”. If there was a time to take the time to explain this, it was when the first one came through. They didn’t and that’s perfectly fine but circling back later and trying to make a justifiable reason after the fact is either a shitty thing to do to the random people that were trying to contribute and didn’t understand the stance or the stance was only “fuck AI”, then they felt there was a reason they should explain or had to come up with a more palatable explanation later. My thoughts on AI actually don’t matter at all. I have concerns the realistic expectations of this policy but there’s no rules all policies must be maximally realistic. like I said earlier I wish Zig all the best in there endeavor. it just seems like this coming out now after there attitude and lack of explanation is new policy masking as policy that always applied.

I mean, maybe I am wrong but this seems like a bit of revisionism/justifying previous actions with a more palatable excuse other than fuck AI. Especially when you go and look at the attitude and literal words from the devs in those PR’s (check their github for term AI in the closed PR’s). whether you agree with the sentiment or not the genie is out of the bottle, you can ban it as much as you want but it’s creeping into every part of nearly every project or its dependencies. I genuinely wish zig the best in their endeavour regardless of This bit of “revisionism”.

can you explain what you mean? what do you mean by verify? the contents integrity(a checksum)? the ability to confirm it was not modified once distributed (Public key cryptography e.g. PGP)? something else?

in fairness English does this a lot even in the modern day, take for example words like Umami, Siesta, Rendezvous, or Schadenfreude. these get sprinkled into conversations to add context and add “flair” to conversations or to attempt to communicate more eloquently. There’s this culture of English being such a widely used and flexible standard where rules are far too complex or dependent on location that there is relatively few “language police” and you can pretty much get away with any other languages loan words as long as it is an adjective or noun. People like to sound intelligent and cultured and sprinkling a couple easy to recognize loan words tends to “fit the bill”.

You’re going to have a hard time getting anyone to say in any concrete way that one license or another is compatible because apple has never stated which licenses are compatible or not. they only point at the terms of service and tell you to figure it out yourself and be prepared for apple to remove it at any time if they disagree with you/your lawyer.

IANAL but in general you can choose a wide variety of permissive licenses like: MIT/ISC Apache 2 or the BSD (2/3) clause licenses

Copyleft licenses are pretty much incompatible based on most agreed upon terms but maybe you have a fleet of lawyers better than apples that are willing to fight it out :)

MIT is still libre per GNU definition. https://www.gnu.org/gwm/libredocxml/x15.html I assume you mean copyleft for software license. closest thing to copyleft in creative commons is cc by-sa https://pitt.libguides.com/ld.php?content_id=18024633.