九维我操你爹
想摘录下重点，结果发现每个字都很重要
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/RE9meSvjOullpoir-B5FkQ
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/RE9meSvjOullpoir-B5FkQ
找到这个频道想去举报一下相关视频帮忙减少一下影响，结果发现夸张一点来说不如直接把历史所有投稿都举报个遍算了
好好地睡一觉不好吗我要跑去吃大便
说到底为什么这种人渣会有这么多关注者呢？这样是要人怎么能跟着附和一句「not all…」呢？
好好地睡一觉不好吗我要跑去吃大便
说到底为什么这种人渣会有这么多关注者呢？这样是要人怎么能跟着附和一句「not all…」呢？
今日も日本語の勉強を頑張ってきた！
―嘘である。
この社畜
定時退社にしろ残業にしろ一夜漬けをせず、
遊びが優先で勉強を後回しにしようと必死である…ッ！！
落とされるのも
厭わぬこの胆力！
まるで自分の死期を
察したかの如き
生き急ぎ！！
―嘘である。
この社畜
定時退社にしろ残業にしろ一夜漬けをせず、
遊びが優先で勉強を後回しにしようと必死である…ッ！！
落とされるのも
厭わぬこの胆力！
まるで自分の死期を
察したかの如き
生き急ぎ！！
中国领导人习近平考察中国国家版本馆，提及曾经独立的琉球王国（今日本冲绳）与福建的历史渊源，意外触动中日关系的敏感神经。北京是在打“冲绳牌”，亦或只是事发偶然？ bbc.in/3NptWmZ source
BBC News 中文
中日关系：习近平为何提及“琉球”历史？北京打“冲绳牌”的政治战略
习近平近日考察中国国家版本馆提及当时独立的“琉球王国”（今日本冲绳）与福建的历史渊源，意外触动中日关系的敏感神经。北京是在打“冲绳牌”吗？背后有哪些考量？
- 2021 年的最終觀察名單。
- 目前Microsoft與Niantic有合作關係。
- 針對 AR 與 Microsoft 合作。
- 與 Microsoft 一起探索軟件和硬件的未來發展。
#Microsoft #Niantic
【經歷親人過世、生命破敗，#林生祥 回到高雄美濃，重新做人】
2022年12月4日，是音樂人林生祥「重新做人」的開端。
在這個開端的六個月後，他的樂團「生祥樂團」以專輯《#江湖卡夫卡》入圍2023年第34屆金曲獎最佳樂團與最佳裝幀設計獎。此時外界看到的林生祥，是工作邀約、獲獎不斷，但許多破敗，他自己知道。
前幾年，林生祥完全感受到「生命的破敗」。演唱會音響出包、疫情阻滯演出、至親接連過世。他覺得很多東西失去控制。「就是那種，無，無……無能為力。那種無能為力。」他停頓再三，才能繼續說下去。
中年人生的困頓，像顛狗的命運，記錄在入圍金曲獎的專輯《江湖卡夫卡》裏。就是在這樣的停滯和破敗，林生祥決定回到創作最初的demo，回訪客庄，回到高雄美濃，重新做人：https://bit.ly/3PylG6W
2022年12月4日，是音樂人林生祥「重新做人」的開端。
在這個開端的六個月後，他的樂團「生祥樂團」以專輯《#江湖卡夫卡》入圍2023年第34屆金曲獎最佳樂團與最佳裝幀設計獎。此時外界看到的林生祥，是工作邀約、獲獎不斷，但許多破敗，他自己知道。
前幾年，林生祥完全感受到「生命的破敗」。演唱會音響出包、疫情阻滯演出、至親接連過世。他覺得很多東西失去控制。「就是那種，無，無……無能為力。那種無能為力。」他停頓再三，才能繼續說下去。
中年人生的困頓，像顛狗的命運，記錄在入圍金曲獎的專輯《江湖卡夫卡》裏。就是在這樣的停滯和破敗，林生祥決定回到創作最初的demo，回訪客庄，回到高雄美濃，重新做人：https://bit.ly/3PylG6W
端傳媒 Initium Media
林生祥重新「做人」：當你50歲，完全感受到「生命的破敗」｜金曲獎2023
所以命運像癲狗，命運不停，他也不能停。
Who wants to build around an ecosystem where the open source users are called freeloaders and where massive disruptions are implemented in the middle of a release cycle, two times in a row, with no warning?
But... it's within their rights, so I won't argue that point. What I will argue is the current subscription agreement, which might not be legal. Red Hat currently says they can cancel any user's account if they download the source code and redistribute it.
Let's say someone downloads the source through a Red Hat subscription, and uses that to build a new version of Rocky Linux. If Red Hat retailiated by cancelling that subscription, I'd definitely tune into that court case.
https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2023/im-done-red-hat-enterprise-linux
Let's say someone downloads the source through a Red Hat subscription, and uses that to build a new version of Rocky Linux. If Red Hat retailiated by cancelling that subscription, I'd definitely tune into that court case.
https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2023/im-done-red-hat-enterprise-linux
https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2023/jun/23/rhel-gpl-analysis/
IBM's Red Hat definitely deserves credit for so carefully constructing their business model such that it has spent most of the last two decades in murky territory of “probably not violating the GPL”.
We fear that be it through incompetence or malice, many RHEL salespeople and business development professionals may regularly violate GPL and no one knows about it. That said, the business model as described by IBM's Red Hat may well comply with the GPL — it's just so murky that any tweak to the model in any direction seems to definitely violate, in our experience.
Furthermore, Red Hat exploits the classic “caveat emptor” approach — popular in many a shady business deal throughout history. While, technically speaking, a careful reader of the GPL and the RHEL agreements understands the bargain they're making, we suspect most small businesses just don't have the FOSS licensing acumen and knowledge to truly understand that deal.
Due to this ongoing bad behavior by IBM's Red Hat, the situation has become increasingly complex and difficult to face. No third party can effectively monitor RHEL compliance with the GPL agreements, since customers live in fear of losing their much-needed service contracts. Red Hat's legal department has systematically refused SFC's requests in recent years to set up some form of monitoring by SFC. (For example, we asked to review the training materials and documents that RHEL salespeople are given to convince customers to buy RHEL, and Red Hat has not been willing to share these materials with us.) Nevertheless, since SFC serves as the global watchdog for GPL compliance, we welcome reports of RHEL-related violations.
IBM's Red Hat definitely deserves credit for so carefully constructing their business model such that it has spent most of the last two decades in murky territory of “probably not violating the GPL”.
We fear that be it through incompetence or malice, many RHEL salespeople and business development professionals may regularly violate GPL and no one knows about it. That said, the business model as described by IBM's Red Hat may well comply with the GPL — it's just so murky that any tweak to the model in any direction seems to definitely violate, in our experience.
Furthermore, Red Hat exploits the classic “caveat emptor” approach — popular in many a shady business deal throughout history. While, technically speaking, a careful reader of the GPL and the RHEL agreements understands the bargain they're making, we suspect most small businesses just don't have the FOSS licensing acumen and knowledge to truly understand that deal.
Due to this ongoing bad behavior by IBM's Red Hat, the situation has become increasingly complex and difficult to face. No third party can effectively monitor RHEL compliance with the GPL agreements, since customers live in fear of losing their much-needed service contracts. Red Hat's legal department has systematically refused SFC's requests in recent years to set up some form of monitoring by SFC. (For example, we asked to review the training materials and documents that RHEL salespeople are given to convince customers to buy RHEL, and Red Hat has not been willing to share these materials with us.) Nevertheless, since SFC serves as the global watchdog for GPL compliance, we welcome reports of RHEL-related violations.
