~sircmpwn

Philadelphia, PA

https://drewdevault.com

I write code.

~sircmpwn/aerc

Last active 32 minutes ago

~sircmpwn/ctools

Last active 3 hours ago

~sircmpwn/sr.ht-ops

Last active 8 hours ago

~sircmpwn/sr.ht-dev

Last active 10 hours ago

~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

Last active 10 hours ago

~sircmpwn/sr.ht-announce

Last active 18 hours ago

~sircmpwn/alpine-aports

Last active 18 hours ago

~sircmpwn/email-test-drive

Last active 20 hours ago

~sircmpwn/alpine-devel

Last active a day ago

~sircmpwn/public-inbox

Last active 2 days ago
View more

Recent activity

Re: Ethical repository evaluation of SourceHut 16 hours ago

From Drew DeVault to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

On Sat Jan 25, 2020 at 10:23 AM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> Non-rivalrous: totally unlimited use by anyone, nobody takes away from
> anyone else
>
> Rivalrous: my use limits your use
>
> Rivalrous aspects of basically any FLO project: the hosting
> infrastructure, development/maintenance/support time from people
>
> Yes exactly, someone has to foot the bill. The only question is whether
> the bill goes *up* more than negligibly as the service gets more use.
> Surely there's a base-level cost that remains regardless of usage. If
> each new repository or user account has no noticeable effect on the
> costs, then it's all basically non-rivalrous.

Re: Ethical repository evaluation of SourceHut 17 hours ago

From Drew DeVault to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

On Sat Jan 25, 2020 at 10:00 AM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> Non-rivalrous means that when someone new access something it in no way
> detracts from anyone else. So, people running copies of software. When
> their use of a web service involves *negligible* bandwidth or hassle
> from the limited-time of the service providers, it's effectively
> non-rivalrous. Rivalrous includes stuff like video-hosting
> (high-bandwidth) and support energy from people and food and cars etc.
> private goods.
>
> See https://wiki.snowdrift.coop/about/economics for more

In what way does SourceHut then qualify as rivalrous? Do you just mean
that the hosting infrastructure is privately owned? I mean, someone's
got to foot the bill...

Re: Ethical repository evaluation of SourceHut 17 hours ago

From Drew DeVault to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

On Fri Jan 24, 2020 at 8:33 AM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> To just be clear about that: our mission is funding public goods,
> meaning non-rivalrous. Bandwidth at SourceHut is technically rivalrous
> but it might as well be non-rivalrous for smaller projects.

What does non-rivalrous mean in this context?

> So, my long-term dream would be that Snowdrift.coop's crowdmatching
> funds SourceHut development and the basic maintenance of the hosting
> service. Then, anyone who needs beyond a modest size repo or wants
> more dedicated support service will pay you for that (or get sponsored
> if need be).

Hm, not really interested in this. Let's talk in private if you want my

Re: [PATCH meta.sr.ht] Fix ssh api for current database schema 18 hours ago

From Drew DeVault to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-dev

Why is this necessary?

Re: Ethical repository evaluation of SourceHut 18 hours ago

From Drew DeVault to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

On Sat Jan 25, 2020 at 6:20 PM, Elliot Bräck wrote:
> Well, if that's the case then that's the case. I must say that it's not
> a robust approach however, and it arguably isn't strictly required for
> the functioning of the service. Goodhart's law: whatever characteristic
> you can measure, they can game.

This is why I won't go into detail on what characteristics I'm
measuring. The monitoring is robust, I can assure you.

> Another approach is to offer direct bank transfer. Ask people to wire
> money to your business' account with the message field being their
> username. Money orders or cheques sent through postal mail would also
> work for American customers.

Re: Ethical repository evaluation of SourceHut 18 hours ago

From Drew DeVault to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

On Sat Jan 25, 2020 at 5:30 PM, Elliot Bräck wrote:
> A+1: You could log IP addresses in a masked format. This is also
> required by the GDPR, I think. I have never given my active, informed
> consent to having my IP stored. (Not doing this could potentially put
> you on the hook for a €20M fine, or require you to break requirements
> C2 and C3)

This is a flawed understanding of the GDPR. I don't need your consent to
log your IP address with a reasonable retention policy, as long as I
comply with the rest of the GDPR.

> Furthermore, IP blocking is not going to mesh well with Tor. Are you
> going to ban Tor (violating C3), or give attackers a free pass as long
> as they use Tor (making the IP blocking moot)?

[PATCH] testing/brltty: disable ppc64le 20 hours ago

From Drew DeVault to ~sircmpwn/alpine-aports

---
 testing/brltty/APKBUILD | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/testing/brltty/APKBUILD b/testing/brltty/APKBUILD
index 3c1a6d65d6..c732ae53c9 100644
--- a/testing/brltty/APKBUILD
+++ b/testing/brltty/APKBUILD
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ pkgver="6.0"
pkgrel=0
pkgdesc="Refreshable braille display driver daemon"
url="http://brltty.app"
arch="all"
arch="all !ppc64le"
[message trimmed]

[PATCH] testing/brltty: fix package errors a day ago

From Drew DeVault to ~sircmpwn/alpine-aports

---
 testing/brltty/APKBUILD | 17 +++--------------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/testing/brltty/APKBUILD b/testing/brltty/APKBUILD
index f3434aad9c..3c1a6d65d6 100644
--- a/testing/brltty/APKBUILD
+++ b/testing/brltty/APKBUILD
@@ -14,13 +14,8 @@ makedepends="
	linux-headers
	tcl
	"
install="$pkgname.pre-install $pkgname.post-install"
subpackages="$pkgname-dev $pkgname-doc"
[message trimmed]

[PATCH] testing/liblouis: lint a day ago

From Drew DeVault to ~sircmpwn/alpine-aports

---
 testing/liblouis/APKBUILD | 5 ++---
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/testing/liblouis/APKBUILD b/testing/liblouis/APKBUILD
index 08f2b35221..9e330bbe16 100644
--- a/testing/liblouis/APKBUILD
+++ b/testing/liblouis/APKBUILD
@@ -1,12 +1,11 @@
# Maintainer: Drew DeVault <sir@cmpwn.com>
pkgname="liblouis"
pkgver="3.12.0"
pkgrel=1
pkgrel=2
[message trimmed]