But are they on Mastodon? This is a very important factor for my purchasing decision.

For context, Steam is now forced to display this due to a new law passed in California: https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/26/24254922/california-digital-purchase-disclosure-law-ab-2426

Valve is not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts.

I really would have loved for the “ride out” cutscene to play in one piece. Having Volt run along instead of hopping on a bike is chef’s kiss

Everyone in this thread is already using Linux and just using this thread to circlejerk about issues the average Windows user won’t care about.

*price

No, this is not correct at all! You keep limiting yourself to the terms “open source” and “closed source”.

Any code you create, you own by copyright. Even if it is public on GitHub, you’re still the lone copyright owner and no one is legally allowed to do with it what isn’t allowed by a license.

Projects on GitHub without an open source license are only “functionally open source” to the same extent that pirated games are “functionally free”.

Correct, you are allowed to click the “fork” button and nothing else. You’re still not allowed to download, use, modify, compile or redistribute the code in any way that doesn’t involve the “fork” button.

Even if Proton VPN collects logs (which hasn’t been proven once in its 7 years of operation), it becomes a matter of who you’d rather trust with your browsing habits: Your ISP or Proton.

The industry takes advantage of open source projects that have permissive licenses. This is an important distinction.

If you didn’t release your code with a permissive license (or even with a license at all), you have rights that protect you and your code. The only issue is that copyright infringement can often be hard to prove if you didn’t plan ahead for it.

And how are they supposed to sell consumer information that’s end-to-end-encrypted?

Proton has been offering free services for 10 years now. And they don’t profit from your data, so your assertion is false.

Proton has offered free plans for all its products for the last 10 years.

If it wasn’t sustainable, I think we’d have noticed by now.

This is not the case with Proton. Paid subscriptions effectively subsidize free users.

I’m seeing this misconception in a lot of places.

Just because something is on GitHub, doesn’t mean it’s open source. It doesn’t automatically grant permission to share either.

I’m noticing this misconception in a lot of places.

Just because something is on GitHub, doesn’t mean it’s open source.

You can use whatever license you want. You can even go ahead and write your own license from scratch.

You’d only have to worry about enforcing the license, especially when you include such unorthodox terms and conditions.

What are you concerned about? A new, more expensive plan appearing out of nowhere?

Occam’s Razor applies here.

Lemmy has its own API. Does this prove their ignorance of the standard too?

You should see what happens when someone posts news about Windows