~phate

https://Phate6660.codeberg.page

I'm a Linux enthusiast who also programs for fun. I'm also a privacy activist, to a fault really.

~phate/ppkg

Last active 1 year, 7 months ago

~phate/srht

Last active 1 year, 8 months ago

~phate/tes-rpc

Last active 1 year, 8 months ago

~phate/lobsters

Last active 1 year, 8 months ago

~phate/bc-lyrics

Last active 1 year, 8 months ago

~phate/rsmpv

Last active 1 year, 9 months ago

~phate/rsmpc-gui

Last active 1 year, 9 months ago

~phate/mpc-status

Last active 1 year, 9 months ago

~phate/nixinfo

Last active 1 year, 9 months ago

~phate/rsfetch

Last active 1 year, 9 months ago
View more

Recent activity

Re: Feature request: Count files containing "LICENSE" in the name as a valid license 1 year, 9 months ago

From ValleyKnight to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

There's nothing else to really say.

I know I'm an idiot with crazy ideas.

Nobody seems to understand how much software licensing truly aggravates me.

This has been slowly building up for years.

I'm just now realizing how much this truly affects me.

I can clearly see now how incompatible I am with other programmers and 
the software development ecosystem.

Sorry for wasting everyone's time.

Re: Feature request: Count files containing "LICENSE" in the name as a valid license 1 year, 9 months ago

From ValleyKnight to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

 > but just people refusing to use your software.

Then I really should just remove my software from the internet then.

I really shouldn't bother with sharing anything.

Software development isn't for me.

I'm simply just not compatible with the rest of the group.

Re: Feature request: Count files containing "LICENSE" in the name as a valid license 1 year, 9 months ago

From ValleyKnight to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

I don't like the unlicense either. You shouldn't need multiple paragraphs.

Maybe if only the first line was included. Aghh, I just can't. I can't.

This is why I made a 2 line license.

I know it probably can't be upheld in court.

I know others could take advantage of the license.

I know I should probably go with a pre-existing license.

But I just can't. I don't care about any of that.

Re: Feature request: Count files containing "LICENSE" in the name as a valid license 1 year, 9 months ago

From ValleyKnight to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

 > You can't just ignore it, sorry. It's like gravity, it doesn't 
require you to believe in it for it to affect you, and you can't run 
away from it.

I just... need some time to think. For the time being, I'll symlink 
LICENSE to NON-LICENSE.md.

I honestly don't know if I could go back to use a pre-existing licenses. 
This truly bothers me a lot.

Every license I've looked at or used just fills me with disgust, and dread.

It's almost not worth sharing what I make if I have to go back to them.

Re: Feature request: Count files containing "LICENSE" in the name as a valid license 1 year, 9 months ago

From ValleyKnight to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

 > Try WTPFL

I have, but I don't like that either. I hate the usage of license-speak, 
and I hate the fact that it even carries a copyright all.

This is what I ended up doing for my license (NON-LICENSE.md):

```

Anybody, is allowed to do anything, with this software.

*Any and all copyright restrictions are hereby revoked.*
```

Re: Feature request: Count files containing "LICENSE" in the name as a valid license 1 year, 9 months ago

From ValleyKnight to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

 > Be _VERY_ careful about putting anything out there on "your own 
terms", as that will, without exception, come back to be worse then you 
can possibly imagine.

I know. My terms are very simple, anyone can do anything they want and 
that all copyright restrictions are revoked.

 > Or better yet, don't put it in public at all, as that sounds what you 
really want to do here.

That's actually the opposite. I want my software to be 100% public 
domain without any restrictions at all. I know I'd probably be better 
off with a pre-existing license, but I just hate them all. They all 
leave me with this disgusting horrible feeling that would make me rather

Re: Feature request: Count files containing "LICENSE" in the name as a valid license 1 year, 9 months ago

From ValleyKnight to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

Sorry for the late response, I quickly realized that ProtonMail's web 
interface is garbage for mailing lists.


So I set up Hydroxide and Thunderbird.


 > No. The policy is not to continue to expand the detection to support the

 > innumerable conventions that the human race will come up with, but to

 > tell projects to start conforming to the conventions we already support.

Feature request: Count files containing "LICENSE" in the name as a valid license 1 year, 9 months ago

From ValleyKnight to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

I currently use my own license, and to really clarify how I feel about licensing, I have called it the NON-LICENSE. I would be really nice if there was some way to tell the repo that there is a license included, or if sourcehut would be detect files with LICENSE in the name. Because it's kind of annoying to see the license disclaimer on my repos when I know I included a license. I understand if this isn't something anyone would be interested in, but I just thought I'd bring it up.


Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

[PATCH] Demonstrate that I can use git send-email 1 year, 9 months ago

From ValleyKnight to ~sircmpwn/email-test-drive

From: Ash <valleyknight@protonmail.com>

---
 phate | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
 create mode 100644 phate

diff --git a/phate b/phate
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6d0ecfd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/phate
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
I'm about to try git send-email
[message trimmed]