Search
1000 results for “neil_mason”
-
Neil Marshall’s ‘The Lair’ starring Charlotte Kirk and Jamie Bamber heads to Blu-ray, DVD and digital http://dlvr.it/SqfCwQ
#BlazingMinds #FilmMastodon #NeilMarshall #JamieBamber #HorrorFilms #Shudder #AcornDVD
-
Neil Marshall’s ‘The Lair’ starring Charlotte Kirk and Jamie Bamber heads to Blu-ray, DVD and digital http://dlvr.it/SqfCwQ
#BlazingMinds #FilmMastodon #NeilMarshall #JamieBamber #HorrorFilms #Shudder #AcornDVD
-
@neil
I'm not knowing of any plattform that is particular designed for that and being opensource
There are tons of ridesharing plattforms.
Some non-profit as I remember, and a lot for profit.
By design, even so I dislike the company I liked #flinc the most
(you can just start a trip and get picked up on the way through sharing your position with drivers that are close by)
for specific events just pads are often used
I've been told some had also used the http://hitchwiki.org chat
1/2 -
Neil Marshall’s ‘Compulsion’ Set to Premiere at The Mediterrane Film Festival (EXCLUSIVE) – Film News in Brief
#Variety #News #Compulsion #MediterraneFilmFestival #TheAcademyMuseumofMotionPictureshttps://variety.com/2025/film/news/neil-marshall-compulsion-premiere-film-news-in-brief-1236433054/
-
Neil Marshall’s ‘Compulsion’ Set to Premiere at The Mediterrane Film Festival (EXCLUSIVE) – Film News in Brief
#Variety #News #Compulsion #MediterraneFilmFestival #TheAcademyMuseumofMotionPictureshttps://variety.com/2025/film/news/neil-marshall-compulsion-premiere-film-news-in-brief-1236433054/
-
Neil Marshall’s ‘Compulsion’ Set to Premiere at The Mediterrane Film Festival (EXCLUSIVE) – Film News in Brief
#Variety #News #Compulsion #MediterraneFilmFestival #TheAcademyMuseumofMotionPictureshttps://variety.com/2025/film/news/neil-marshall-compulsion-premiere-film-news-in-brief-1236433054/
-
Neil Marshall’s ‘Compulsion’ Set to Premiere at The Mediterrane Film Festival (EXCLUSIVE) – Film News in Brief
#Variety #News #Compulsion #MediterraneFilmFestival #TheAcademyMuseumofMotionPictureshttps://variety.com/2025/film/news/neil-marshall-compulsion-premiere-film-news-in-brief-1236433054/
-
@neil I felt the same way for years but then I joined #EasterHegg (much smaller scale, very cosy) and I got hooked! #eh20 #ccc
-
@neil I felt the same way for years but then I joined #EasterHegg (much smaller scale, very cosy) and I got hooked! #eh20 #ccc
-
@neil I felt the same way for years but then I joined #EasterHegg (much smaller scale, very cosy) and I got hooked! #eh20 #ccc
-
@neil I felt the same way for years but then I joined #EasterHegg (much smaller scale, very cosy) and I got hooked! #eh20 #ccc
-
@neil Yeah. I wonder what #FOSS, #OpenHardware smartwatches are an alternative. That #Pebble reboot looks fun. To be honest, I'd just need step counter and maybe heart rate, the #PineTime was enough. I had an #AmazfitBip watch before and I loved its reflective always-on screen. Software was terrible though.
-
Neil Young Cancels Remainder of Crazy Horse Tour, Including Hollywood Bowl and Ohana Fest
#Variety #News #NeilYoung #NeilYoungCrazyHorsehttps://variety.com/2024/music/news/neil-young-cancels-tour-dates-crazy-horse-ohana-1236050287/
-
Neil Young & Crazy Horse, Pearl Jam to Headline Ohana Festival 2024
#Variety #News #NeilYoung #NeilYoungCrazyHorse #OhanaFestival #Pearljamhttps://variety.com/2024/music/news/ohaha-festival-neil-young-crazy-horse-pearl-jam-1235979777/
-
Neil Young & Crazy Horse Announce First National Tour in 10 Years, Behind New Retrospective Album, ‘Fu##in’ Up’
#Variety #News #NeilYoung #NeilYoungCrazyHorse #RecordStoreDayhttps://variety.com/2024/music/news/neil-young-crazy-horse-tour-announce-album-1235909412/
-
Neil Patrick Harris Defends Much-Hated “How I Met Your Mother” Finale: ‘Big Supporter of It’ (Exclusive)
NEED TO KNOW Neil Patrick Harris says he’s a fan of the How I Met Your Mother series…
#NewsBeep #News #TV #AlysonHannigan #AU #Australia #BarneyandRobin #BarneyStinson #Entertainment #HowIMetYourMother #JasonSegel #JoshRadnor #NeilPatrickHarris #TedMosby
https://www.newsbeep.com/au/544751/ -
Neil Patrick Harris Defends Much-Hated “How I Met Your Mother” Finale: ‘Big Supporter of It’ (Exclusive)
NEED TO KNOW Neil Patrick Harris says he’s a fan of the How I Met Your Mother series…
#NewsBeep #News #TV #AlysonHannigan #AU #Australia #BarneyandRobin #BarneyStinson #Entertainment #HowIMetYourMother #JasonSegel #JoshRadnor #NeilPatrickHarris #TedMosby
https://www.newsbeep.com/au/544751/ -
@neil I have a #Hauk (https://github.com/bilde2910/Hauk) instance on my server, and sometimes I use it to share my location with my wife when we want to meet up somewhere. But I don't do it constantly. (I tried, but she isn't interested :P)
-
-
-
-
-
@neil @tallship @tallship @smallcircles That got concatenated here on Hubzilla...
Here it is again.
Are we really discussing this now? And Is it the FOSS project you know that I’m thinking of? 🙂
I’ve been mired in the Codeberg issue tracker lately and haven’t given chat the attention it deserves, but I’ve only got so much time (money) to spend in contributing to the project each week and I have had to draw a hard budget line at $1.2k/week. I wish I could afford to donate more money each week to the project, but I also have to spend time actually earning that money as well as spending it elsewhere on comfort items… Like watching movies or going to see a local musician or poet perform. Lolz…
Anyway, here’s my take. MIT and BSD licenses are nice but subject to capture, and designed to work in a world that was generally without patent trolls in a sharing, institutional education environment.
Scientists share - hypercapitalist corporations rip you off, inject proprietary closed sourced code into MIT licensed code they don’t have to show you (a mere copyright notice stating that the product contains at least some freely licensed code will suffice in satisfying the licensing terms)… And if there’s a novel “process” involved (i e., federating capabilities) they patent YOU and YOUR COLLEAGUES work for themselves.
A few years back, I was stunned to find out that #Microsoft was receiving about $7 from every single #Android device shipped for #patents they hold related to Linux.
But again, I digress…
Okay…
Basically, and for my part, I say “Copyleft”, in the most general terms, and if it’s software that is well suited as a self or commercially hosted SaaS offering environment, then #AGPL - but then, that begs your question: AGPL v3 or later, or AGPL v3 only?
Yes, if you say, “or later”, then you run the risk of unfavorable licensing at some point in the future, but that’s not a certainty.
But it is a constant, distinct possibility. Always has been.
Being a pain in the ass to go from “3 only”, or to “or later”, or to some other constraint is an inconvenience - that’s all. Time, labor, money. That’s pretty much it when it comes to re-licensing. That cost goes down if #CONTRIBUTING.md specifies that contributors agree to the project re-licensing their contributions under some other #Copyleft license at some point in the future.
To answer the rest of your question, I’mma just gonna get all #Socratic on you…
) Do you trust #RMS and the #FSF? - that used to be the question to ponder, because you were actually assigning control to them.
) What would #Linus do?
Actually, what did Linus do?
He chose #GPL v2 a long time ago when he re-licensed the #Linux kernel.
He also chose GPL v2 “only” - and you can search on #PeerTube for videos that have him explaining why, and further, why he is happy that he didn’t choose, “or later”, and how he feels that, in retrospect, that would have been a very bad thing.
So here’s my 2¢, and I’ve already expressed this in my typical “IMNSHO” fashion a couple of times before in the project’s Matrix room (if we’re talking about the same project), but I’ll give it again here one more time.
A.) Do it now, rather than later, or do it yesterday if that’s possible yet (you may need to consult H.G. Wells or Einstein in that regard).
B.) Use a Copyleft license - specifically, I’m advocating for AGPL - but as long as it’s Copyleft, preferably AGPL v3, my immediate concerns are alleviated. Whether that’s “only”, or “or later”, that’s of very little import AFAIC.
C.) Ensure that CONTRIBUTING.md states that the project is at liberty to contribute patches to the deprecated, antecedent project in the form of patches gifted to them under the terms of the MIT license - after all, we want to be good neighbors and software stewards in the #FOSS space
I’ve already discussed the simplicity of doing so in chat and consensus was roundly in favor with this approach, and also in doing it now.
D.) Hard fork now.
Finally, there had been much concern expressed from several of the other project members that we’re going to suffer recruiting issues by not being able to insure to potential new contributors that their efforts won’t be subject to #corporate or #special interest or #trademark lobby #capture, where they could likely see their blood, sweat, and tears released as #closed source #proprietary products, until such time as we do re-license under a Copyleft license.
I hope that helps! 🙂
#tallship
⛵
. -
@neil @tallship @tallship @smallcircles That got concatenated here on Hubzilla...
Here it is again.
Are we really discussing this now? And Is it the FOSS project you know that I’m thinking of? 🙂
I’ve been mired in the Codeberg issue tracker lately and haven’t given chat the attention it deserves, but I’ve only got so much time (money) to spend in contributing to the project each week and I have had to draw a hard budget line at $1.2k/week. I wish I could afford to donate more money each week to the project, but I also have to spend time actually earning that money as well as spending it elsewhere on comfort items… Like watching movies or going to see a local musician or poet perform. Lolz…
Anyway, here’s my take. MIT and BSD licenses are nice but subject to capture, and designed to work in a world that was generally without patent trolls in a sharing, institutional education environment.
Scientists share - hypercapitalist corporations rip you off, inject proprietary closed sourced code into MIT licensed code they don’t have to show you (a mere copyright notice stating that the product contains at least some freely licensed code will suffice in satisfying the licensing terms)… And if there’s a novel “process” involved (i e., federating capabilities) they patent YOU and YOUR COLLEAGUES work for themselves.
A few years back, I was stunned to find out that #Microsoft was receiving about $7 from every single #Android device shipped for #patents they hold related to Linux.
But again, I digress…
Okay…
Basically, and for my part, I say “Copyleft”, in the most general terms, and if it’s software that is well suited as a self or commercially hosted SaaS offering environment, then #AGPL - but then, that begs your question: AGPL v3 or later, or AGPL v3 only?
Yes, if you say, “or later”, then you run the risk of unfavorable licensing at some point in the future, but that’s not a certainty.
But it is a constant, distinct possibility. Always has been.
Being a pain in the ass to go from “3 only”, or to “or later”, or to some other constraint is an inconvenience - that’s all. Time, labor, money. That’s pretty much it when it comes to re-licensing. That cost goes down if #CONTRIBUTING.md specifies that contributors agree to the project re-licensing their contributions under some other #Copyleft license at some point in the future.
To answer the rest of your question, I’mma just gonna get all #Socratic on you…
) Do you trust #RMS and the #FSF? - that used to be the question to ponder, because you were actually assigning control to them.
) What would #Linus do?
Actually, what did Linus do?
He chose #GPL v2 a long time ago when he re-licensed the #Linux kernel.
He also chose GPL v2 “only” - and you can search on #PeerTube for videos that have him explaining why, and further, why he is happy that he didn’t choose, “or later”, and how he feels that, in retrospect, that would have been a very bad thing.
So here’s my 2¢, and I’ve already expressed this in my typical “IMNSHO” fashion a couple of times before in the project’s Matrix room (if we’re talking about the same project), but I’ll give it again here one more time.
A.) Do it now, rather than later, or do it yesterday if that’s possible yet (you may need to consult H.G. Wells or Einstein in that regard).
B.) Use a Copyleft license - specifically, I’m advocating for AGPL - but as long as it’s Copyleft, preferably AGPL v3, my immediate concerns are alleviated. Whether that’s “only”, or “or later”, that’s of very little import AFAIC.
C.) Ensure that CONTRIBUTING.md states that the project is at liberty to contribute patches to the deprecated, antecedent project in the form of patches gifted to them under the terms of the MIT license - after all, we want to be good neighbors and software stewards in the #FOSS space
I’ve already discussed the simplicity of doing so in chat and consensus was roundly in favor with this approach, and also in doing it now.
D.) Hard fork now.
Finally, there had been much concern expressed from several of the other project members that we’re going to suffer recruiting issues by not being able to insure to potential new contributors that their efforts won’t be subject to #corporate or #special interest or #trademark lobby #capture, where they could likely see their blood, sweat, and tears released as #closed source #proprietary products, until such time as we do re-license under a Copyleft license.
I hope that helps! 🙂
#tallship
⛵
. -
@neil @tallship @tallship @smallcircles That got concatenated here on Hubzilla...
Here it is again.
Are we really discussing this now? And Is it the FOSS project you know that I’m thinking of? 🙂
I’ve been mired in the Codeberg issue tracker lately and haven’t given chat the attention it deserves, but I’ve only got so much time (money) to spend in contributing to the project each week and I have had to draw a hard budget line at $1.2k/week. I wish I could afford to donate more money each week to the project, but I also have to spend time actually earning that money as well as spending it elsewhere on comfort items… Like watching movies or going to see a local musician or poet perform. Lolz…
Anyway, here’s my take. MIT and BSD licenses are nice but subject to capture, and designed to work in a world that was generally without patent trolls in a sharing, institutional education environment.
Scientists share - hypercapitalist corporations rip you off, inject proprietary closed sourced code into MIT licensed code they don’t have to show you (a mere copyright notice stating that the product contains at least some freely licensed code will suffice in satisfying the licensing terms)… And if there’s a novel “process” involved (i e., federating capabilities) they patent YOU and YOUR COLLEAGUES work for themselves.
A few years back, I was stunned to find out that #Microsoft was receiving about $7 from every single #Android device shipped for #patents they hold related to Linux.
But again, I digress…
Okay…
Basically, and for my part, I say “Copyleft”, in the most general terms, and if it’s software that is well suited as a self or commercially hosted SaaS offering environment, then #AGPL - but then, that begs your question: AGPL v3 or later, or AGPL v3 only?
Yes, if you say, “or later”, then you run the risk of unfavorable licensing at some point in the future, but that’s not a certainty.
But it is a constant, distinct possibility. Always has been.
Being a pain in the ass to go from “3 only”, or to “or later”, or to some other constraint is an inconvenience - that’s all. Time, labor, money. That’s pretty much it when it comes to re-licensing. That cost goes down if #CONTRIBUTING.md specifies that contributors agree to the project re-licensing their contributions under some other #Copyleft license at some point in the future.
To answer the rest of your question, I’mma just gonna get all #Socratic on you…
) Do you trust #RMS and the #FSF? - that used to be the question to ponder, because you were actually assigning control to them.
) What would #Linus do?
Actually, what did Linus do?
He chose #GPL v2 a long time ago when he re-licensed the #Linux kernel.
He also chose GPL v2 “only” - and you can search on #PeerTube for videos that have him explaining why, and further, why he is happy that he didn’t choose, “or later”, and how he feels that, in retrospect, that would have been a very bad thing.
So here’s my 2¢, and I’ve already expressed this in my typical “IMNSHO” fashion a couple of times before in the project’s Matrix room (if we’re talking about the same project), but I’ll give it again here one more time.
A.) Do it now, rather than later, or do it yesterday if that’s possible yet (you may need to consult H.G. Wells or Einstein in that regard).
B.) Use a Copyleft license - specifically, I’m advocating for AGPL - but as long as it’s Copyleft, preferably AGPL v3, my immediate concerns are alleviated. Whether that’s “only”, or “or later”, that’s of very little import AFAIC.
C.) Ensure that CONTRIBUTING.md states that the project is at liberty to contribute patches to the deprecated, antecedent project in the form of patches gifted to them under the terms of the MIT license - after all, we want to be good neighbors and software stewards in the #FOSS space
I’ve already discussed the simplicity of doing so in chat and consensus was roundly in favor with this approach, and also in doing it now.
D.) Hard fork now.
Finally, there had been much concern expressed from several of the other project members that we’re going to suffer recruiting issues by not being able to insure to potential new contributors that their efforts won’t be subject to #corporate or #special interest or #trademark lobby #capture, where they could likely see their blood, sweat, and tears released as #closed source #proprietary products, until such time as we do re-license under a Copyleft license.
I hope that helps! 🙂
#tallship
⛵
. -
@neil @tallship @tallship @smallcircles That got concatenated here on Hubzilla...
Here it is again.
Are we really discussing this now? And Is it the FOSS project you know that I’m thinking of? 🙂
I’ve been mired in the Codeberg issue tracker lately and haven’t given chat the attention it deserves, but I’ve only got so much time (money) to spend in contributing to the project each week and I have had to draw a hard budget line at $1.2k/week. I wish I could afford to donate more money each week to the project, but I also have to spend time actually earning that money as well as spending it elsewhere on comfort items… Like watching movies or going to see a local musician or poet perform. Lolz…
Anyway, here’s my take. MIT and BSD licenses are nice but subject to capture, and designed to work in a world that was generally without patent trolls in a sharing, institutional education environment.
Scientists share - hypercapitalist corporations rip you off, inject proprietary closed sourced code into MIT licensed code they don’t have to show you (a mere copyright notice stating that the product contains at least some freely licensed code will suffice in satisfying the licensing terms)… And if there’s a novel “process” involved (i e., federating capabilities) they patent YOU and YOUR COLLEAGUES work for themselves.
A few years back, I was stunned to find out that #Microsoft was receiving about $7 from every single #Android device shipped for #patents they hold related to Linux.
But again, I digress…
Okay…
Basically, and for my part, I say “Copyleft”, in the most general terms, and if it’s software that is well suited as a self or commercially hosted SaaS offering environment, then #AGPL - but then, that begs your question: AGPL v3 or later, or AGPL v3 only?
Yes, if you say, “or later”, then you run the risk of unfavorable licensing at some point in the future, but that’s not a certainty.
But it is a constant, distinct possibility. Always has been.
Being a pain in the ass to go from “3 only”, or to “or later”, or to some other constraint is an inconvenience - that’s all. Time, labor, money. That’s pretty much it when it comes to re-licensing. That cost goes down if #CONTRIBUTING.md specifies that contributors agree to the project re-licensing their contributions under some other #Copyleft license at some point in the future.
To answer the rest of your question, I’mma just gonna get all #Socratic on you…
) Do you trust #RMS and the #FSF? - that used to be the question to ponder, because you were actually assigning control to them.
) What would #Linus do?
Actually, what did Linus do?
He chose #GPL v2 a long time ago when he re-licensed the #Linux kernel.
He also chose GPL v2 “only” - and you can search on #PeerTube for videos that have him explaining why, and further, why he is happy that he didn’t choose, “or later”, and how he feels that, in retrospect, that would have been a very bad thing.
So here’s my 2¢, and I’ve already expressed this in my typical “IMNSHO” fashion a couple of times before in the project’s Matrix room (if we’re talking about the same project), but I’ll give it again here one more time.
A.) Do it now, rather than later, or do it yesterday if that’s possible yet (you may need to consult H.G. Wells or Einstein in that regard).
B.) Use a Copyleft license - specifically, I’m advocating for AGPL - but as long as it’s Copyleft, preferably AGPL v3, my immediate concerns are alleviated. Whether that’s “only”, or “or later”, that’s of very little import AFAIC.
C.) Ensure that CONTRIBUTING.md states that the project is at liberty to contribute patches to the deprecated, antecedent project in the form of patches gifted to them under the terms of the MIT license - after all, we want to be good neighbors and software stewards in the #FOSS space
I’ve already discussed the simplicity of doing so in chat and consensus was roundly in favor with this approach, and also in doing it now.
D.) Hard fork now.
Finally, there had been much concern expressed from several of the other project members that we’re going to suffer recruiting issues by not being able to insure to potential new contributors that their efforts won’t be subject to #corporate or #special interest or #trademark lobby #capture, where they could likely see their blood, sweat, and tears released as #closed source #proprietary products, until such time as we do re-license under a Copyleft license.
I hope that helps! 🙂
#tallship
⛵
. -
Neil Young & Crazy Horse played 2 nights at Forest Hills Stadium (night 2 pics, setlists, full video)
https://www.brooklynvegan.com/neil-young-crazy-horse-played-2-nights-at-forest-hills-stadium-night-2-pics-setlists-full-video/#brooklynvegan_category_music #Music #Photo_Galleries #bvhome #Neil_Young #Neil_Young_and_Crazy_Horse #Reverend_Billy #Reverend_Billy_and_the_Stop_Shopping_Choir
-
Neil Sedaka Leaves a Legacy: Micky Dolenz Pays Tribute https://www.byteseu.com/1834663/ #GreatBritain #MickyDolenz #Tribute #UnitedKingdom
-
Neil’s Howe
It was pleasing to see the Nelson Stone restored to its correct postion. Or should I say the 19th-century boundary stone.
One of the last times I was here, in 2017, it had vanished. I learnt later it had unceremoniously been dumped in a nearby pond. That act of vandalism must have taken some doing.
Although the larg ...
http://www.fhithich.uk/?p=30682
#BylandAbbey #NorthYorkMoors #Osmotherley #Snilesworth #Whorlton #boundarystone #medieval #standingstone
-
Neil’s Howe
It was pleasing to see the Nelson Stone restored to its correct postion. Or should I say the 19th-century boundary stone.
One of the last times I was here, in 2017, it had vanished. I learnt later it had unceremoniously been dumped in a nearby pond. That act of vandalism must have taken some doing.
Although the larg ...
http://www.fhithich.uk/?p=30682
#BylandAbbey #NorthYorkMoors #Osmotherley #Snilesworth #Whorlton #boundarystone #medieval #standingstone