Security through obscurity isn’t security.

UBlacklist does this, but you have to define what URLs are garbage manually.

Thank you for posting the solution you found. If you don’t mind, what OS are you using?

Asks for people’s opinions. Tells them they’re wrong. Nicely done.

Oh I see, I misread the announcement then.

That isn’t what happened according to the queer.af admins. They decided to let the domain registration lapse cause they didn’t want to support that government fiscally even indirectly.

It’s definitely a rule that can be taken so far that it is counterproductive, but I think it’s good practice to thbk about how I could use something other than a raw string ( even if it’s just a constant defined somewhere )

He doesn’t want to push at such a late hour. Give him a break.

I’m looking at it with optimism for a new build tool. I just need Sass/CSS compilation and I’ll give it a whirl.

I mean you can make whatever terms you want in a license if it’s yours. As for standard licenses like MIT or GPL. I’m not aware of any that currently exist.

It’s getting into the realm of law where the answer is almost always “it depends”

Everyone has good answers but I would check the license of more obscure libraries to just be sure you’re not violating it. GitHub has a handy feature that explains the license (if one exists) in easy to understand terms. I’ve never ran into this issue myself but it’s a good habit to have. Especially when you’re working for a company.

And keep it that way! We need people on both sides to further spur progress. Plus I’m jealous cause I still don’t have a firm grasp on docker.

I still think lemmy and it’s likes are still getting a lot of core issues worked out. This feels like beta software and with the major version being 0 it’s understandable for me. I think a disclaimer that the tech is new and may have issues would help with keeping people from writing it if entirely.