Just break the law. You’ve not stated what the sentence is and it doesn’t sound very enforceable

Yeah I’ve always just used note taking apps for this. Currently been using Notesnook for a couple of years and it’s worked super well for me.

I don’t see much of that stuff. I mostly subscribe to foss communities and I mostly see relevant stuff about foss and tech. Subscribe to communities pertaining to your hobbies/interests and your feed should reflect that

If that’s sincerely how you see plagiarism (ie allowing someone to use your work as part of their work without attribution) then all I can say is that I’ve never seen anyone else use the term plagiarism that way; and unless either of us knows of a survey quantifying how people use the term, that’s as far as we’ll get on that front.

Anyway, the conversation is still about BSD, and you keep avoiding the fact that BSD requires attribution. If you are using the Wikipedia definition then it does not satisfy

representation of another person’s language … as one’s own original work

Do you or do you not think that BSD/MIT is plagiarism? You seem to be clearly dodging the question. If you don’t think it’s plagiarism then there’s no major disagreement and we can end this conversation.

Ok, in that case your definition is inclusive of things which are not conventionally considered plagiarism. Ghostwriting is commonly looked down upon, but not considered plagiarism. A large part of a non-legalistic definition of plagiarism includes a lack of consent from the original creator; if you take a job as a ghostwriter, you agree to your writing being published under a different name. If I work as a developer for someone who wants to make their own app, say a YouTuber, and they publish the app I wrote as <YouTuber’s> app, most people would consider that perfectly normal and not plagiaristic, since the developer was paid for a service in which it was understood their work would be published under a different person’s name.

You are also avoiding the original question about BSD and MIT, and not explaining why that is plagiaristic. Do you still think they are plagiaristic? If so, how? Given that both the licensor explicitly wanted people to be able to re-use their code in proprietary software (i.e. consent/permission exists), and these licences require attribution (i.e. not only are you not taking credit for it, you are actively naming and crediting the original author).

Multivitamins don’t have much, if anything, by way of caloric value.

I don’t have a legalistic view of the world; I am saying plagiarism is a legalistic concept. For context, I support the abolition of law and of intellectual property. Plagiarism is a particular kind of violation of intellectual property law, and without IP, it makes no sense. You still fail to define a plagiarism outside of the law, and you also fail to define a plagiarism that does not violate MIT/BSD. MIT/BSD both require attribution. You cannot claim MIT/BSD code written by someone else as your own without breaking copyright law.

No, actually, plagiarism is a legalistic term. If IP law did not exist, neither would plagiarism.

And if you give someone permission to use your IP, and they go ahead and use that permission, it is not plagiarism neither legally nor by any colloquial understanding of the term. That is what happens when someone uses BSD or MIT code in their proprietary software. It is explicitly allowed, by design, by intention.

without attribution

BSD/MIT also don’t allow you to not attribute the author of the BSD/MIT code, so that doesn’t even make sense. You are perhaps thinking of code released public domain, in which case, again, the author specifically chose that over BSD/MIT, and the main practical difference is not needing to give attribution, so that must be what the original author wanted.

I know. It’s a verbal shorthand.

You could write a userscript to maintain a blacklist with eg greasemonkey

Just direct it into a file, read the script, and run it if you’re happy. It’s just a shorthand that doesn’t require saving the script that will only be used once.

That is definitionally not plagiarising. It follows IP law, which is the opposite of plagiarism.

MIT/BSD also makes the most sense for small/minimal projects where GPL is likely overkill. A 100 line script does not need to be GPL’ed. A small static website does not need to be GPL’ed.

It’s not “stealing”. It’s explicitly allowed. Using IP according to its licence is the opposite of stealing.

I never made a MS account, so I no longer own Minecraft since they stopped accepting Mojang accounts. Sometimes I wish I had just bit the bullet and made one so I can still own Minecraft—I know I can pirate it, but it’s less convenient, and also I don’t know how well pirated Minecraft works with multiplayer. In any case I’ve just not played Minecraft in a long time, and not since Minecraft stopped accepting Mojang logins.

I am surprised you can’t transfer your licence to another account though. Since when they were making the switch to Microsoft accounts, they let you just transfer your licence from Mojang onto any old MS account.

Ultimately it’s up to you. I guess in your shoes I would be more erred towards deleting just because of all that personal information sitting around. Of course you can’t guarantee MS will “forget” it, but storage costs money, and they likely don’t want to keep around all your old data when most of it is not very profitable data to have. In my case, in hindsight, I’m now erring on the side of wishing I had just made an account, since there’d be no other data tied to that account and I wouldn’t have used it for anything other than Minecraft.

Do they get therapy in their benefits package?

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/dec/18/kenya-facebook-moderators-sue-after-diagnoses-of-severe-ptsd

This kind of moderation is generally outsourced to people in the global south paid pennies. And no, they don’t get therapy.

A centrist mainstream national newspaper to be aware of what the political mainstream is concerned about.

Al Jazeera for international news.

Articles sent to me by friends and comrades for news on more specific matters that may not make more mainstream news.

And groupchats and internal publications of organisations I’m in for both more politically-relevant news (eg news of local strikes that often aren’t otherwise reported on) and commentary.

Reading articles and books

I don’t know about the US specifically, but oftentimes, and definitely where I’m from, laws can have a small amount of “common sense” leeway and judges can find justifications for rulings if they want to rule a particular way. e.g. I have pirated games that I legally bought because there’s literally no functioning “official” download link anymore, if anyone were to ever prosecute me for that, even if it were illegal technically a judge could find a way to rule it lawful out of sympathy or whatever other reason, if they wanted to. A lot of the time it’s “the government can’t have possibly intended this law to be enforced this way, therefore I rule XYZ”.

In any case, as you said, I’ve never heard of anyone being pursued for that. And if it’s not enforced, it’s not a law.

You likely also participate in rituals that were taught to you that are not solely grounded in logic or science. Do you do things in a certain order for no reason other than your parents taught you to do so? Do you avoid eating certain foods because you never ate them growing up?

People who are raised religious may not be fanatic believers, but they may still be “culturally religious” e.g. take part in Ramadan, avoid eating pork, because that’s the way they grew up, and a lot of the time it means they can be included in cultural matters of the community they come from.

As for why some people are proper religious, fully believing and all, I also don’t think all beliefs have to be rational. Some beliefs are comforting. If it helps someone to get through a difficult time by believing there’s a higher power rooting for them, or who has pre-planned their suffering for a greater good, they may choose to believe that because it’s mentally easier. Arguably that is a rational belief anyway because it benefits you and makes your life easier to get through.