- Joined
- May 2, 2017
- Messages
- 7,762 (2.60/day)
- Location
- Back in Norway
System Name | Hotbox |
---|---|
Processor | AMD Ryzen 7 5800X, 110/95/110, PBO +150Mhz, CO -7,-7,-20(x6), |
Motherboard | ASRock Phantom Gaming B550 ITX/ax |
Cooling | LOBO + Laing DDC 1T Plus PWM + Corsair XR5 280mm + 2x Arctic P14 |
Memory | 32GB G.Skill FlareX 3200c14 @3800c15 |
Video Card(s) | PowerColor Radeon 6900XT Liquid Devil Ultimate, UC@2250MHz max @~200W |
Storage | 2TB Adata SX8200 Pro |
Display(s) | Dell U2711 main, AOC 24P2C secondary |
Case | SSUPD Meshlicious |
Audio Device(s) | Optoma Nuforce μDAC 3 |
Power Supply | Corsair SF750 Platinum |
Mouse | Logitech G603 |
Keyboard | Keychron K3/Cooler Master MasterKeys Pro M w/DSA profile caps |
Software | Windows 10 Pro |
But why is it wrong for the organization in charge of development of said open-source software to implement rules and regulations that apply (only) to itself and its contributors? I'd say that's just as relevant and logical for them as it is for any other organization responsible for carrying out complex work with many moving parts.A market versus open source software. Unregulated markets lead to events like Black Tuesday--the equivalent of an economic weapon of mass destruction. Open source software...who does it hurt when it goes terribly wrong? It gets forked and people move on.