since you think she should get nothing from both spotify and onlyfans
I don’t know where you got that “both” from.
Regular people don’t get royalties for their work either. Factory workers who assemble ovens don’t get a cut from each meal a restaurant cooks, for example. Those filthy rich musicians, Hollywood actors, etc. keep leaving out that they’ve already been paid millions for their work. They leave out that they sold the publishing rights to record companies. They act as if they earned less than you and me. They are doing absolutely fine. No need to fight for a right to better royalties or anything like that. If they need more money, they can just make new music.
What’s her cut of that?
I don’t know, you made the comment that she’s “making ludicrously little from spotify”, so you should know.
Also, nobody should care because: “Allen’s most recent album, No Shame, dropped in 2018.” Those are royalties for doing no work since then. She got paid handsomely by the record company for the distribution rights. She gets paid handsomely whenever she’s on concert. Ongoing royalties are a BS concept.
While still making ludicrously little from spotify.
“Allen’s daily Spotify earnings are $4,077, or about $1.4 million per year.”
If that’s “ludicrously little”, I want to be as poor as she.
Always porting not-yet-upstreamed patches to new release kernels is additional work to the upstreaming work towards the latest development tree. The Valve engineers interviewed around the very first Steam Deck announcement said their goal with moving from Debian to Arch was to minimize the patchset maintenance burden. Their approach surely has that goal in mind. There are only two variants of Steam Deck with minor differences between them. If backporting patches from newer kernels is less work than forward porting their patches, they just stay with that version for a while. Updates to drivers for hardware they don’t use and filesystems they don’t use aren’t relevant to them anyway.
Them switching to PowerVR GPU is also interesting. Not sure if itis related to Qualcomm-ARM lawsuit.
They used Mali graphics previously.
They cannot veto it. The patents for x86-64 and SSE2 lapse next year. The only say they have is on extension newer than these two.
X64 doesn’t exist. Microsoft used the label for Windows for a while to distinguish from IA64 (Itanium) and 32bit x86 editions of Windows but these days Microsoft moved mostly away from those labels and only uses them when talking about ARM.
Stipes Frittierte Pizza (Napolitan-style fried pizza)
It could be a web app like Voyager but you really shouldn’t just enter your credential willy nilly all over the place.
for non-commercial uses
Why not GPL like id Software did when they still were cool.
Bluesky is the promise of Mastodon with none of the failsafes of Mastodon.
Why do farmers keep buying that shit?
You replied to a comment referencing the open source definition and it’s clear you did never read it.
Atlassian could sell extensions, though, they would just need to comply with the AGPL. The AGPL means that the entire platform must comply with the AGPL, so proprietary platforms couldn’t use it but in a fair “applies to everyone the same” and not “we don’t like you individually” kind of way.
How is that not open source?
Google “open source definition” and read for yourself.
Its still totally open source
No, it’s not. Those restrictions are against the open source definition.
Edit: Lol, people with no clue donvoting what they don’t want to hear. The open source definition is a fixed set of clauses. Read up on it.
I don’t know much about that game and I cannot speak for rape victims and their feelings of a comic strip but two repeated calls for your death over there with further excuses here are way over the line of a heated argument, so that person is now permabanned from here.
I think I tried Winamp back in the day but never really understood it.
What was there not to understand? It was a basic music player with playlist functionality, a plugin infrastructure to support playback of pirated music in underground formats like MP3, at the price of completely free and no ads (the website had banners but not the player).
So cite it as “via…” but linking to the original source, especially one without ads and user tracking, is obviously best practice. Nobody in their right mind would deny that, unless there is financial incentive to link to that ad-ridden site.
Edit: Also “Rule 9: Use the original source”
Apple probably paid for it