So they're saying that the AGPL v3 additional terms for Only office include this:

• the obligation to retain the original product logo
• the denial of any rights to use the copyright holder’s trademarks

How can you retain the original logo if you don't have the right to use their trademarks? (I'm assuming they have a trademark for the logo)

This feels like a sleazy attempt to find a loop hole in the AGPL language to restrict commercial use. Afaik, GPL licenses specifically allow commercial distribution, as not doing so would be a restriction on freedom.

If Only Office doesn't want people to do this, they could have very easily just chosen a different license from the beginning. I find it hard to see them as the good guy here.

And in the 38th edition of Gray’s Anatomy in 1995 it was introduced as just “a small version of the penis”.

When in doubt, just say it's some type of penis.

Never fails.

Thank fuck I switched to Zsh

I don't get it, are knives illegal in Italy? What if I want to cut my spaghetti?

when now-XLibre developer Enrico Weigelt was making a lot of changes to the codebase that then ended up with a lot of that code being later reverted.

Looked this guy up, and apparently he's a right wing anti-vax nutjob who got yelled at by Linus Torvalds for spreading misinformation on the kernel mailing list.

Why do we have people like this?

• Futo's software (incl their keyboard) is not open source
• Their founder has ties to Curtis Yarvin. Look him up.

Drew Devault is a controversial personality, but his article on this topic has a good summary of the facts: https://drewdevault.com/2025/10/22/2025-10-22-Whats-up-with-FUTO.html

Maybe dead capacitors? If you don't have a multimeter and soldering iron, this is a good excuse to get/learn those things!

Everyone knows that memory safety isn't the only source of security vulnerabilities (unless you're bickering about programming languages on the internet, in which case 100% of security vulnerabilities are related to memory safety)

Rust users are one of Rust's biggest weaknesses.

I'm sitting around doing IT shit waiting things to download/backup/install/etc and have nothing better to do, so here's an AI-free explanation with code samples:

It's basically just a code style thing. Standard C allows you to declare unnamed structs/unions within other structs/unions. They must be unnamed, so it'd look like this:

struct test {
        int a;
        struct {
                char b;
                float c;
        };
        double d;
};

Which is fine, but the -fms-extensions flag enables you to do the same thing with named structs. For example:

struct test {
        int a;
        struct test2 {
                char b;
                float c;
        };
        double d;
};

without -fms-extensions, the above will compile, but won't do what you might assume. b and c will be members of struct test2, not test. So something like this won't compile:

struct test my_test;
my_test.b = 1; // error: ‘struct test’ has no member named ‘b’

But with the flag, not only does it work, it also lets you do some convenient things like this:

struct test2 {
        char b;
        float c;
};
struct test {
        int a;
        struct test2;
        double d;
};
//...
struct test my_test;
my_test.b = 1; //OK

That is, you can reuse an existing struct definition, which gives you a nice little tool to organize your code.

Source: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Unnamed-Fields.html

Because source maps show how shitty your organization's code and overall engineering practices are.

I installed Opera and used it exclusively.

Why do people use Opera? It's a proprietary Chrome fork owned by a Chinese company.

Honestly, there's probably a bigger market for a working printer than for their laptops.