Being “ready” means nothing, it is just a thought in your head. Praxis requires that you act. You aren’t ready for an uprising if you aren’t actually organizing towards one yourself. And I have yet to meet a successful revolutionary organizer that tries to sheepdog for literally genocidal Democrats.

I haven’t advocated for “doing nothing”, I have advocated against supporting genocide from both a moralizing and electorally strategic angle. I choose these angles because it is the language most people will understand and because the propaganda that I oppose in the process teaches people to give up leverage and cheerlead, which is literally disempowering.

If people want recommendations on something positive to do, I would recommend joining the Uncommitted Movement if you prefer electoralism. If you are interested in politics that also extends beyond electoralism, I would be happy to provide advice on any local groups and reading materials.

They will not exist so long as you vote for “lesser evil” genociders. Why would there be? You still vote for them! They don’t need to listen to you at all and will gladly continue the project that is in their overall material interest in supporting Israel. You show up in their databases as, “Likely Democratic voter” and so they send some volunteers to try to get you to vote and they ask you for money. That is how you are thought of, and I mean this literally. That is how they curate and use their information. The rest is PR for how to ensure you don’t take these looney anti-genociders too seriously.

There is no “push from there” without leverage. If they don’t do what you want, what are you going to do? With what power? If you mske a threat, why is it credible? We are kept docile and ineffective through electoral illogic that serves the interests of the existing political class and cannot imagine gaining or wielding power in any practical way.

What is the logic for supporting 99% Hitler when you could actually choose to work against 99% Hitler and Hitler himself? This is genocide, not a marginal tax bracket you can lesser evil about. The systematic destruction of a people is as bad as it gets, generally speaking.

If you support this and tell other people to vote for it, you are complicit.

The Biden-Harris administration will say they are troubled and then provide $3 billion more to Israel.

If you own the copyright then yes this is 100% legal.

There are already apps that are like this. They usually add a couple features to the paid release so that people feel like they are getting something extra for the money. The good ones will eventually move those features to the open release eventually. However, this incentivizes keeping part of the app closed source so that nobody can just rename and re-release the paid version.

It is 100% up to you for how to handle these tradeoffs. Personally, I think so long as you are principled and ready for some criticism - and can handle it gracefully - getting paid for work that builds your open source app is a very good idea. We don’t all have the luxury of maintaining high quality unpaid side projects!

I would recommend using this as an opportunity to build out and use a backups system. Whenever I get a new laptop, for example, I just make a(nother) backup on the old laptop and restore whatever I want to the new one. If there are any files I want that are normally excluded from backups, I either tweak my rules to include those files/put them in a different directory and repeat the process or just make a new manual external backup copy temporarily.

If you have good backups then your new drive can be populated from them after creating new partitions. Optionally, you can also take this opportunity to reinstall the OS, which I personally prefer to do because it tends to clean up cruft.

Also, if you go this route, your data on your old drive is 100% intact throughout the process. You can verify and re-verify that all the files you want are backed up + restored properly before finally formatting the old drive for use in the NAS.

Use something like rclone (that can use file change deltas) when you just need to copy files to remotes and feel free to combine it with an incremental backup solutions like Borg or restic or some custom rsync scripting. Example: keep a Borg repository of your laptop or emails or whatever with whatever retention policy you want. Then copy your repository anywhere with rclone or similar.

You are almost on point here, but seem to be missing the primary point of my work. I work as a researcher at a university, doing more-or-less fundamental research on topics that are relevant to industry.

This is something I’m very familiar with.

As I wrote: We develop our libraries for in-house use, and release the to the public because we know that they are valuable to the industry. If what I do is to be considered “industry subsidies”, then all of higher education is industry subsidies. (You could make the argument that spending taxpayer money to educate skilled workers is effectively subsidising industry).

This is largely the case, yes. Research universities do the basic research that industry then turns into a product and makes piles of cash from. And you are also correct that subsidizing STEM education is a subsidy for industry. It very specifically is meant to do that. It displaces industry job training and/or the companies paying to send their workers to get a degree. It also has the benefit of increasing overall supply in theur labor market, which helps drive down wages. Companies prefer having a big pool of potential workers they barely have to train.

We respond to issues that are related either to bugs that we need to fix for our own use, or features that we ourselves want. We don’t spend time implementing features others want unless they give us funding for some project that we need to implement it for.

That’s good!

In short: I don’t work for industry, I work in research and education, and the libraries my group develops happen to be of interest to the industry. Most of my co-workers do not publish their code anywhere, because they aren’t interested in spending the time required to turn hacky academic code into a usable library. I do, because I’ve noticed how much time it saves me and my team in the long run to have production-quality libraries that we can build on.

I think your approach is better. I also prefer to write better-quality code, which for me entails thinking more carefully about its structure and interfaces and using best practices like testing and CI.

If the government is the US (federal), I think you are technically supposed to release your code in the public domain by default. Some people work around this but it’s the default.

But anyways, the example you’ve given is basically that you’re paid with government funds to do work to assist industry. This is fairly similar to the people that do the work for free for industry, only this time it’s basically taxpayersl money subsidizing industry. I’ve seen this many times. There is a whole science/engineering/standards + contractor complex that is basically one big grift, though the individual people writing the code are usually just doing their best.

I’m also an idealist of sorts. The way I see it, I’m developing publicly funded code that can be used by anyone, no strings attached, to boost productivity and make the world a better place. The fact that this gives us publicity and incentivises the industry to collaborate with us is just a plus.

Perhaps it makes the world a better place, perhaps it doesn’t. This part of the industry focuses a lot on identifying a “social good” that they are improving, but the actual impact can be quite different. One person’s climate project is another’s strategic military site selector. One person’s great new standard for transportation is another’s path to monopoly power and the draining of public funds that could have gone to infrastructure. This is the typical way it works. I’m sure there can be exceptions, though.

Anyways, I would recommend taking a skeptical eye to any position that sells you on its positive social impact. That is often a red flag for some kind of NGO industrial complex gig.

Calling it a self-imposed unpaid internship, when I’m literally hired full time to develop this and just happen to have the freedom to be able to give it out for free, is missing the mark.

Well you’re paid so of course it wouldn’t be that.

Also, we develop these libraries primarily for our own in-house use, and see the adoption of the libraries by others as a great way to uncover flaws and improve robustness. Others creating closed-source derivatives does not harm us or anyone else in any way as far as I can see.

Sometimes the industries will open bug reports for their free lunches, yes. A common story in community projects is that they realize they’re doing a lot of support work for companies that aren’t paying them. When they start to get burned out, they put out calls for funding so they can dedicate more time to the project. Sometimes this kind of works but usually the story goes the other way. They don’t get enough money and continue to burn out. You are paid so it’s a bit different, but it’s not those companies paying you, eh?

You aren’t harmed by closed source derivatives because that seems to be the point of your work. Providing government subsidy to private companies that enclose the derivative product and make money for their executives and shareholders off of it.

Oh no I mean that there are companies that just don’t care about licensing and plod ahead hoping it’s never an issue. Like having devs build a “prototype” that they know uses AGPL code and saying, “we will swap this out later” and then 6 months later the “prototype” is in production.

Personally, I make a lot of my personal projects’ code closed because I specifically don’t want it to be useable by others. Not for jerky reasons, but strategic ones. IMO common licenses don’t achieve what a lot of people hope they do.

Software licenses don’t change ownership. That requires transfer of copyright, like with contributor agreements.

Though I am aware that a small set of people seek less copyleft licenses because they think they’re better. They are usually wrong in their thinking, but they do exist.

I’m not sure what you are referring to about ontologically bad. Has someone said this?

Yes you can. You just change the license that lives with the code.

What it changes depends on the project, how it’s used, who uses it, etc. It’s really a social question of how people might interact with your project differently.

The MIT license guarantees that businesses will use it because it’s free and they don’t have to think about releasing code or hiding their copyright infringement. The developers I’ve seen using that license, or at least those who put some thought into it, did do because they want companies to use it and therefore boost their credibility through use and bug reports, etc. They knowingly did free work for a bunch of companies as a way to build their CV, basically. Like your very own self-imposed unpaid internship.

The GPL license is also good for developers, as they know they can work on a substantial project and have some protections against others creating closed derived works off of it. It’s just a bit more difficult to get enterprise buy-in, which is not a bad thing for many projects.

killing or ejecting

So you have more accurately revised your claim. I’m glad that I could help you reach a better understanding.

I could go point by point debunking a number of your claims and exaggerations, but there’s clearly no point in wasting any more time conversing with you.

Okay bye then.

Ah okay. Thank you for helping me understand!

I was referring to the primary aid borde crossing between Gaza and Egypt. Maybe I had a typo, maybe not. If my next word has “removed” in it, then part of the name is censored. Rafah. If not, I originally had a typo.

Thanks again!

Hamas were elected to power by winning a plurality of the votes, whereupon they formed a coalition government. Then they killed their coalition to make a single-party government.

An absurd falsehood. Fatah refused to form a government with Hamas, but the idea that Hamas simply killed them I’d an absurd invention. A child’s fantasy.

The lack of elections in Gaza since then is because Hamas and Fatah can’t agree on the terms and conditions of the next election, which had been scheduled and postponed multiple times prior to this war.

As an occupied people this onus actually falls on the occupier, believe it or not.

In my opinion, the main problem is that Hamas was afraid of losing seats to Fatah, because they were getting very unpopular before the war.

Congratulations on having a wrong opinion.

The fact is that elections are not actually blocked by Israel. Good to see that you spout bullshit in your first sentence without checking facts first, though. That tells me how seriously I should take the rest of your comment.

Israel is an occupying power and culpable for all that occurs under their occupation. They are an illegitimate and racist government that has always dramatically meddled in these elections. Or are you unaware of what happened in East Jerusalem in 2006? Your narrative conventiently ommits any mention of this.

International law does not give any government the right to resist occupation by any or “all necessary means.” That’s another little lie you slipped in. The territory of Palestine is a signatory to the Geneva Convention, which means that the laws of war apply.

‘UNGA Resolution 37/43 (1982) reaffirmed the “inalienable right” of the Palestinian people “and all peoples under foreign and colonial domination” to self-determination. It also reaffirmed the legitimacy of “the struggle of peoples for […] liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle.”’

It is not difficult to find and establish the right for the Palestinian people to fofhyan armed struggle against all occupiers. This has been affirmed and reaffirmed many times. I mention this under the presumption that you or others care about “the rules” this being foundational to pretenses of legitimacy.

Palestine was not a signatory to the Geneva convention, this is a ahistorical nonsense. The PLO unilaterally declared it in 2014, that’s a decade ago. When the Geneva Convention was drafted, Palestine was “legally” under British control and was not in a position to have such sovereignty.

I am amused by your little attempts at jabs, though. They are revealing.

But Hamas does not follow the laws of war… They target civilians instead of military installations, they engage in perfidy through the use of civilian clothes, which puts the actual civilian population of Gaza in great danger.

No more than any other group.

You’d feel better if you told the truth. There are strong truthful arguments against both Israel and Hamas. Because both are directly responsible for the genocide of Palestinians.

Hamas is not responsible for the genocide of Palestinians. That falls on the greater occupying powers that forced displacement, disposession , and mass murder upon them, which is of course Western powers and their Zonist compatriots. You are carrying water for them by promulgating these falsehoods.

I suggest you focus on the parties which are directly responsible, rather than moaning about the “complicity” of random foreigners in an attempt to disparage everyone who doesn’t buy into your terrorist whitewashing and disinformation campaign.

I am focused on the parties directly responsible. Only you are under the delusion that a militarized resistance to occupation is somehow responsible for the apartheid regime imposed by another power, the indiscriminate civilian bombing campaigns carried out by that power, the full blockade of Gaza by that power, the storming of refugee camps by that power. It is a twisted and dishonest rationalization that blames the resistance to oppressio for the oppression itself, absolving the holders of the guns, the missiles, the planes, the invading forces, the village burners.

I’m not going to feel guilty for ensuring that Hamas gets their fair share of the blame.

I hadn’t asked you to feel guilty. But it seems you have an inkling that you support genocide and need a way to absolve yourself. You won’t find that absolution from myself. Perhaps you will find it in a truck marked for aid for Palestinian refugees that is actually full of IOF soldiers ready to help kill 200 refugees in exchange for 4 Israelis. Perhaps you will find absolution in the propaganda campaigns to demonize some of those 4 Israelis who say their experience during capture amounted to having to clean and cook and receive birthday cakes. How dare they humanize Palestinians. Somewhere in that mess of thought, you might find the train of thought that resolves the inconsistencies you are clearly concerned about, though making the wrong choice at every turn.

Personally, I have not focused on your absolution. That is something you have raised. I hope that you find it honestly and with a prioritization of humanity and truth, which stands in contrast to the lazy read or propaganda you have offered.

Ha sorry this is probably a lot simpler than I’m making it.

From my instance, the comment that doesn’t make sense to me says, “You can’t properly comment from your instance.”.

I was guessing that maybe this was an awkwardly phrased dig at lemmy.ml, but from your responses I’m now wondering if it is some kind of instance-edited message.

I appreciate any clarity you can bring to this! I feel like I’m missing something obvious, lol

Hamas are the ruling party of Gaza, a region occupied by Israelis and not permitted elections for over a decade. By international law, they have every right to resist occupation by all necessary means. I have plenty of criticisms of Hamas, but they are not the primary oppressor in Gaza. That is, obviously, reserved for the occupiers that prevent Palestinians from having food and clean water. From having the right of return. For being permanent refugees.

If Palestine falls, the people who supported their disposession will hold land acknowledgements for them. They refuse to oppose actual genocidal and apartheid regimes. They will only feel guilty after the systems they support have finished the deed. This is the outcome produced by comlicity in oppression and disposession.

You will feel better if you reject these horrors.

I’m still confused, unfortunately, and thank you for bearing with me! I’m used to the word filter just saying “removed” for a single word but this looks different. Any chance you can help me understand what’s different about their comment?

Is it like a bot that edits comments containing censored content to make them look like odd message?