In English: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zigbee
En Français: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZigBee

Open source: you all should use open source and private services because we’re not a corporation out to exploit you or your data.

Disabled users: hey, your registration edit field is not labeled so I can’t use my adaptive technology to register or even use your platform. Could you fix it, because, right now, the mainstream/corporate offering has taken accessibility more seriously and I’d rather use a tool/service that I won’t need to struggle with in order to operate.

Open source: what exactly do you expect? We can’t be expected to make things accessible for you, so you can either fork it yourself or just not use our software/services. We’re a small team and corporation has more money than we do so they can devote more time and effort to accessibility. You can always fork the project though and make accessibility yourself!

Disabled user: well, I can’t code, so it looks like I don’t have any other choice but to go back to using this corporate offering that at least took the time to label their registration field correctly and actually took my request more seriously. Oh well, maybe open source tools just aren’t for me.

A great feedback from a main Nuxt contributor about Open Source contribution

I think open source is a chance to step outside the normal producer-consumer dichotomy and enter the world of relationships. [...] is a chance to give and receive.

How to start contributing?

• If you are new to a project (as to a company), you have a priceless gift. You can see more clearly than people who are already there. You might be in a perfect position to challenge 'received wisdom.' 💡
• If you care about a project, then you are in the best position to make it better.
• Contributing to open source is a phenomenal way to grow.

[about the tech stack with k8s] the payoff feels abstract and are hard to quantify.

It's the same for OSS dependencies.

what if platforms like AWS or GitHub started splitting the check? By adding a line-item to the invoices of their customers to support Open Source finding.

For example, 3% ?

OSS projects have no governance and most of them are not ready to receive money though. How to distribute this tax too?

Another model is to pay depending of how many developer there are in the company.

The second step after recognizing the OSS funding issue is having a baseline funding amount.

The Open Source ideology is misused by companies: its ideology concerns production (similarly to FLOSS). You contribute to the software back.

Copyleft can force an absolute minimal “contribution” back to your project, but it can’t force a good-faith one. This makes it an inadequate tool towards building something with the kinds of values that many developers care about.

But I do think I’ve properly identified the problem: many developers conceive of software freedom as something larger than purely a license that kinds in on redistribution. This is the new frontier for those who are thinking about furthering the goals of the free software and open source movements. Our old tools are inadequate, and I’m not sure that the needed replacements work, or even exist.

A successor for Insomnia and Postman. It catches API requests for now.

La certification peut coûter quelques millions, ce qui est un freins pour le développement de logiciel open-source.

Medical Device Coordination Framework est un outil de coordination des appareils médicaux. L'objectif est de développer une plateforme matérielle open source.

Public sector will develop OSS software and should use them

Une fédération de plusieurs acteurs sous l'entité OSE afin de fournir un meilleur support. J'ai envie de suivre ce que cela devient.

Some commits are misattributed. This is annoying as the proof of work is one of the most important reward in open source.

Maybe 1% are?

Send greeting cards to people contributing to the OSS.

It is rebooted thanks to https://lynnandtonic.com/thoughts/entries/when-your-work-disappears/

An alternative to Kahoot

Is it relevant to maintain a part nobody seems to use?

I’ve come to realize that the relicensing trend towards non-compete licenses has exposed single-vendor Open Source software for what it truly is: proprietary software in hiding

One vendor can turns the (own) project into a proprietary one.

The article is well written and connects multiple topics: line of code and care work to the software, computer architecture and speed, its industry and more.

Debian 12, for comparison, is 1,341,564,204 lines of code. For comparison, Google Chrome is about 40 million lines, which is in the same ballpark as the Linux kernel these days. No one, even a team, can read these entirely.

Computers aren't much faster now than they were a decade ago, and they will probably never again return to the rate of performance improvement they had for 60 years up to the mid-noughties.

The thing is, that doesn't scale very well. On the desktop we have four-core machines and now we're moving to eight-plus cores, but a single person can't use that very helpfully, so instead, we're getting computers with a mixture of high-performance but hot, power-hungry cores, and lower-performance, cooler, but more electrically-efficient cores.

A limit to multiple cores is the Amdahl's law: even if a program can be made 95 per cent parallel, the maximum speedup you can get is about 20 times, no matter how many processor cores you throw at it.