most of a long song 

And then this would follow it and finish the album I'm planning.

Show thread

How tf is Gemini real watch just Self the movie like lmao

I've thought about naming something "Careful with that axe Eugen" but never found that something to write.

A quote from the Unix Hater's Handbook which applies to absolutely nothing else: "Yep, Unix can sure handle text. It can also handle text. Oh, by the way, did I mention that Unix is good at handling text?"

Show thread

my dad, clueless: lol if you grow your hair out you'll look like a proghead
me, trying to transition as much as possible and also a proghead: :blobcatsurprised:

long, pondering names 

I'm starting to think that "vulgar ethical software" isn't a good name for the subject of that critique I wrote. But I can't think of anything better.
Some things that summarise it:
- It's that kind of quasi-"ethical" argument for information hiding, where basically if you're in a cooperative, intellectual property is totally fine. They suggest some difference between worker organisation and the spreading of source materials, and that the first is more important than the second. Because cooperatives can't exploit each other or any of that telekommunist bullshit.
- Many of the arguments involve saying that free software hasn't achieved anything, which is spitting in the face of anyone who publishes free programs, and is absolutely RIGHT OUT when one considers that there are marginalised people who did something and got screwed over; as if to say "Oh well, you achieved nothing in the end. Adopt my moral standards now please? :3"
- Some of the arguments involve that computer languages and programming are difficult to use RIGHT NOW, and so few people actually benefit from providing source materials. So it is no surprise that proponents use inappropriate design techniques, with the effect of ENSURING that few people will be able to read their programs.

The name also only works if you also read that "vulgar anarcho-communism" article or its predecessors. In my opinion, you absolutely should, but otherwise the name makes no sense. So what the hell did I write about?

go make a point for ethical licenses 

"How does [ethical licensing] even matter anyway? Personally, our biggest contribution to the software world is a script to draw catgirls on the console."

Go make a reason for it to matter! I didn't waste three years of my life scheming replicated object systems for someone to say "we can't make anything of any material value" or something disempowering like that. There's no problem if you haven't made anything, but if you have, then there's no point in downplaying it.

You don't have to do anything, yes, but if you want to do something, then do it, and don't be afraid to overstate what you've done! You are perfect, as you are all you can be, and you don't need to be more. :blobcatheart:

Gemini author states Gopher is less than useless [NOT CLICKBAIT] [DOUG ENGELBART CALLED] 

> If you're coming from a web-only background, Mercury might seem at first glance stripped back to the point of uselessness. [...] it's either on equal footing with or clearly more powerful than Gopher in every respect I can think of.

BTW don't fucking follow me if I write "every time you complain we make a computer, and I can't be assed so kindly fuck off instead" in my bio and you have "computers are terrible" as a pinned toot.

For the hell of it, I've been wondering what would be changed in a processor to run a late-bound, safe programming language faster. Nowadays we have really good compilers which do a whole lot of tricks which make the answer "not a lot", but some things like fast write barriers for incremental garbage collection or cryptographic acceleration stand out as useful.

But we can also remove a hellalot of hardware assists for unsafe code. It would be fine to run every hardware thread with the same memory map if one has a safe language, and with a global memory manager you don't need small pages to avoid fragmentation. So is it a matter of carefully adding assists for things we can't compile out (like Smalltalk on a RISC), or removing assists for things we'd never use (vaguely like a GPU)?

fossbro: I don't care about your cooperative give me source code

vulgar ethical source weenie: oh yeah intellectual property is fine and very anti-capitalist keep doing that!!! every time you make a cooperative you do a praxis

egoist telekommunist: But if the cooperative is a society of producers, not a union of Is, each of whom only looks out for himself, then it cannot exist without a producer-consumer distinction and must attach importance to consumption.

Therefore, the two of us, the cooperative and I, are enemies. For me, the egoist, the welfare of this “ethical software” is not in my heart. I sacrifice nothing to it, I only use it; but to be able to use it completely, I transform it instead into my property and my creation; in other words, I destroy it and in its place give me source code lmao

Show thread
Show more

Smol server part of the infrastructure. Registration is approval-based, and will probably only accept people I know elsewhere or with good motivation.