Avatar by eveoart. Artwork - Artist

  • 1 Post
  • 151 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 9th, 2023

help-circle








  • if I write a loophole in your employer’s code, like a patch, that keeps them from having to pay you, and they like not having to pay you, I haven’t done anything egregious or unethical?

    I don’t really care about the ethics in the Revanced situation nor the greater adblocking scene. That’s a moral question for individuals to answer. From a legal perspective, I don’t agree with the removal of original code. While I don’t know of a legal precedent for the digital age, the closest physical comparison I can make is to the distribution of a lock-pick or a gun. And we don’t prosecute lock-pick manufacturers for selling to a thief, we prosecute the thief for breaking into someone’s home with it. Exempting cases where the actual product is illegal, such as specific gun models, but as far as I am aware there is no such law against any software (yet). Even if there were, I doubt it would all under the perview of DMCA. Thus my reasoning for saying this is an abuse of DMCA and my reason for distaste towards the situation.

    Bringing this back to your original comment:

    I wouldn’t expect Spotify to just let people use premium services for free. Fuck Spotify, right there with y’all on that, but this isn’t egregious or unethical behavior for them.

    I wouldn’t expect them to either! But I also don’t expect them to try and take down material they have no right to take down and I would consider that to be a bit ‘egregious’.

    Edit: You know, I should have actually done the research before commenting. Anyway, I looked further into DMCA intent and it covers some circumvention tools which may(?) apply to adblockers, although I haven’t heard of that being tested in court before. Leaving my comment here since it’s already federated anyway.









  • I have two identical HDDs as a mirror, another one that has no failsafe (but it’s fine, because the data it contains is non-critical)

    On separate pools, I hope? My understanding of ZFS is that the loss of any vdev will mean the loss of the pool, so your striped vdev should be in its own pool that you don’t mind losing.