I don't like videos either tbh, but I would be ok with posts that are properly identified, so like [video] [news] [opinion] etc lol

yea and when that happens I just cancel, then I can worry about all the ad blocking and stuff, but currently it's worth it for me

I agree that it's a great investment, and it will definitely get people on board for if the platform really takes off. I think they're definitely assuming that the majority of their people who pay the $400 aren't going to remain on the platform which is probably a safe bet, once they get somewhat established and have content that's more for the everyday person, I would probably recommend converting the lifetime license over to an extended long-term subscription.

So like a subscription that lasts five six years at like the price of 3 years of the monthly subscription price, I know if YouTube offered something like that I 1,000% would buy it in a heartbeat because I know that YouTube will still be around in that time frame and it's a no-brainer cuz I use it daily,

That being said if they did end up having a significant amount of people that are still using the lifetime subscription, they may revert to adding features to the monthly subscriptions like how Discord does that entice you to switch to a new plan with a retroactive sub and then you just can't switch back again.

This should be correct yes, as long as you don't include code that was added after the license change you should be in Clearwater.

Technically speaking I don't think it's allowed for him to have changed the license to a more restrictive license in the first place because he didn't rewrite the entire project when he did so which means it's still containing code that under the license terms are supposed to be open indefinitely, but if you want to avoid all that drama you can just play it safe and Fork the version prior to him editing the license

Personally speaking now this isn't going to stop the people that he's trying to avoid that hassle with, because I don't think he has legal ground because I don't think the license change was within the allowed terms of his license in the first place

Sending as a second comment cuz I just now read your source, but it's different than what my original comment was.

I didn't realize the density that GPL code puts into your project, it does seem upon looking into it that that is correct that he cannot under GPL terms redistribute that software under the license that he's chosen. He is violating the GPL by doing so, because even with permission of the contributors, GPL code cannot be converted over to a lesser freedom code without a full rewrite, because code that was generated while under the GPL can't be locked down at a future date via a license that that is stricter than the existing one. The only thing you can do is make it less restrictive than GPL.

That being said, the only people who can report violations of code that is not following the GPL, are going to be copyright holders so if everyone was indeed okay with it there's no one who would be able to pursue the violation anyway

My main concern is that he states that he has permission from every contributor so he isn't misusing it, then immediately locks the repository to only people who had contributed before.

I understand it's probably just a tactic to lower the amount of useless information from people wanting to comment from posts like this, but it doesn't look good from a point of view of declaring Victory and then retreating immediately.

a retail license doesn't even prompt that, just sign in with your MS account and bobs your uncle, that's how I manage all of my VM stuff I just sign into my primary Microsoft account and it automatically activates, I'm sure one of these days it's going to hit a Hidden activation limit but I'm not really sure how Windows works with that, I don't change vm's all that often.

My main bottleneck for swapping fully off of dual booting is the annoyance when it comes to trying to configure GPU pass through with KVM, I would definitely be using that virtual machine for gaming on the few games that no longer work using proton but like it's such a pain in the butt to set up, that and for the duration of me having to transfer the system I basically need to have twice the amount of disk space because I need to clone that data over to an image before being able to free up the partitions

Man that post is about three or four paragraphs too long to be any Microsoft form advisor post.

Usually it's a "Welcome to the forum, please run an update and sfc /scannow and try safe mode then clean install" then ghosting when you update saying it doesn't work

What's the point of sfc /scannow if it's going to require an installation media to use, isn't that the point of a recovery partition? Does Windows just not ship with that Anymore?

Man the audacity of that though, they came into his house, interrupted his evening and then asked him to turn off the stream that he's doing. All while he didn't actually do anything wrong.

The entitlement is insane.

I had to read the title a few times myself, it's long and most of it could go into the body

tails is a great tool for privacy I always found it more clunky to use sadly, but it's use case as a no log no track style is is amazing. Just don't try to use it with anything that uses external storage, it has a cow.