11:10:39 <ZarterPleaseping> I was earlier recommended a service to exchange bitcoin to monero, would it make a difference from simply exchanging via cake wallet?
11:11:02 <ZarterPleaseping> Moreover is there an android wallet you would recommend more than cake wallet?
11:32:18 <transatoshi[m]> <ZarterPleaseping> "Moreover is there an android..." <- I use the monerujo wallet but cake is great too. You'll maybe get a little higher fee swapping in cake vs a CEX but it's convenient. They have great support on reddit too. 
11:33:36 <transatoshi[m]> <ZarterPleaseping> "I was earlier recommended a..." <- I use tradeogre.com personally. But cake is fine if you like the price. 
11:35:23 <ZarterPleaseping> transatoshi[m]: I am more concerned about the privacy, for example no kyc, no login etc.
11:36:08 <transatoshi[m]> You do have to give email but they do have 2fa which I like. 
11:37:39 <ZarterPleaseping> Thoughts of web3?
11:53:25 <rbrunner> Please give some examples of "web3" things that are in actual use, are useful, are trustworthy, and would withstand the influx of hundreds of millions of users.
11:54:19 <rbrunner> Just like the boring and old "web1"
11:54:30 <nioc> isn't it a way of monetizing and controlling ?
11:55:04 <rbrunner> You mean something with the name of "web" but not actually being a web? :)
12:10:20 <ZarterPleaseping> I meant the way people are talking about it supposedly being decentralized, uncensorable and whatever. Sounds to good to be true. And unmanageable
12:16:55 <Siren[m]> https://web0.small-web.org/
12:29:24 <rbrunner> Maybe you should trust you gut feeling then. And if that's wrong, web3 will enter your life soon enough anyway, no need for FOMO
12:36:18 <ZarterPleaseping> <Siren[m]> "https://web0.small-web.org/" <- Now that sounds like a dream
12:37:11 <ZarterPleaseping> However also unmanageable, how would they prevent cp and something of the sort?
12:37:31 <NicoleSchwab[m]> ZarterPleaseping: What's wrong with chocolate pudding?
12:38:21 <ZarterPleaseping> Everyone doesn't like chocolate pudding
12:38:52 * NicoleSchwab[m] uploaded an image: (104KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/v3/download/monero.social/offLcMDGGnpyiIXQveseAOIz/how-to-make-chocolate-pudding-00a.jpg >
12:38:55 <NicoleSchwab[m]> Seethe
12:40:07 <Siren[m]> ZarterPleaseping: Same as today
12:40:47 <Siren[m]> Internet is already decentralized
13:04:44 <ZarterPleaseping> So basically nothing with change
13:20:56 <SerHack> For monerophp proposal: https://repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/402#note_22039
14:25:18 <Siren[m]> <spirobel[m]> "It gives too much power to the..." <- Same goes for GPL btw
14:25:32 <Siren[m]> Or any other copyleft license
14:25:47 <Siren[m]> All contributors must agree on a license change or there must be CLAs
14:26:23 <Siren[m]> AGPL is open and free but it will prevent development of proprietary applications that interact with it over the network
14:28:46 <Siren[m]> * AGPL is open and free. The catch here is that if someone is running modified version of Cuprate let's say. And the users are interacting with its RPC through a web application. The source of modified Cuprate must be open to the users.
14:30:10 <Siren[m]> AGPL is like GPLv3, it additionally covers the SaaS aspect
14:34:33 <Siren[m]> You can take MongoDB as an example. Community edition is AGPL. Your proprietary application can use it as a database. Only if you have made changes to the code of your MongoDB instance, you must make these changes open source. You application that interacts with mongo can stay proprietary.
14:36:55 <Rucknium[m]> IMHO hard rule is too much. There are many software ecosystems where it is hard to write non-GPL code because of how intertwined packages are.
14:37:28 <Siren[m]> spirobel[m]: Not that complex
14:37:56 <Siren[m]> If you would link or anyhow include Cuprate in your app, then you can treat it as GPL
14:39:23 <Siren[m]> spirobel[m]: Yes you can own the copyright (require ACLs to be signed so things stay this way) and also rock an AGPL license
14:39:35 <Siren[m]> Don't get what's unclear for you
14:41:22 <Siren[m]> spirobel[m]: Then forbid ACLs
14:41:50 <Siren[m]> * Then forbid CLAs
14:42:04 <Siren[m]> You will end up with the same scenario with any license as long as ACLs are present 
14:43:14 <Siren[m]> s/ACLs/CLAs/
14:44:23 <boog900[m]> I'll make it MIT
14:47:07 <Siren[m]> Another thing to note is that you cannot make it MIT if you include a single GPLv3 component
14:47:19 <Siren[m]> But vise versa works
14:47:21 <Rucknium[m]> I like MIT. I try to make my projects MIT. To follow open source rules, I usually have to make my projects GPL since I use functions from packages that are GPL. A hard rule is too impractical.
14:49:47 <Siren[m]> I like AGPL because it does prevent abuse coming from corporate. Another nice thing is that you can sell licenses to people who do not want to contribute back to the project by publishing their changes.
14:51:01 <Siren[m]> * I like GPLv3 and AGPLv3 because it does prevent abuse coming from corporate. Another nice thing is that you can sell licenses to people who do not want to contribute back to the project by publishing their changes.
14:55:57 <Siren[m]> Honestly I don't sympathise with corporate and don't see why you'd be so worried about AGPL
14:56:12 <Siren[m]> I simply won't run anything proprietary that deals with Monero 
14:56:26 <Siren[m]> Siren[m]: And that license prevents these 
14:56:52 <Siren[m]> spirobel[m]: You can simply not offer the license money. And guess what if there's no CLA, you can't anyway
14:56:58 <Siren[m]> You're looking at it wrong
14:57:12 <Siren[m]> * You can simply not offer the commercial license. And guess what if there's no CLA, you can't anyway
14:58:11 <Siren[m]> You won't have legal issues or lawsuits or anything if you just go with GPL/AGPL and no CLAs
15:00:27 <boog900[m]> Monero-serai is MIT
15:07:39 <Siren[m]> I sure hope there won't be a proprietary shitcoin fork of Monero based on Cuprate
15:11:54 <Siren[m]> Yes there's nothing wrong with those companies
15:12:01 <Siren[m]> And they aren't the only ones with this business model
15:15:49 <Siren[m]> Other examples (also those in your screenshot) that aren't "database companies" include nextcloud and wolfssl
15:16:43 <Siren[m]> If you would like to give companies the freedom to abuse their users over SaaS, sure then go with GPLv3
15:17:21 <boog900[m]> <plowsof11> ""Rust Monero node that Synthetic..." <- They created the node under MIT, I joined and we changed it to AGPL/MIT 
15:17:21 <boog900[m]> I'm now in full control of the project and they are not going to be contactable so I might have to keep it AGPL ... 
15:17:21 <Siren[m]> Because remember at the end of the day AGPL exists to protect the 4 freedoms
15:17:49 <boog900[m]> * In reply to @plowsof:matrix.org
15:17:49 <boog900[m]> "Rust Monero node that SyntheticBird45 started" are they happy with MIT
15:17:49 <boog900[m]> They created the node under MIT, I joined and we changed it to AGPL/MIT
15:17:49 <boog900[m]> I'm now in full control of the project but they are not going to be contactable so I might have to keep it AGPL ...
15:19:43 <Siren[m]> Odoo, Mongo, Nextcloud, WolfSSL and many others I know are nice software (or products if you're willing to pay). They're doing well.
15:20:06 <Siren[m]> spirobel[m]: Digilol does write AGPL software if you didn't know
15:20:30 <Siren[m]> And use AGPL software as well without modifications
15:20:42 <Siren[m]> This has never been a problem for us
15:24:30 <Siren[m]> Another nice example is Pretix, the ticket sales system we used for Monerokon. Goes to show how you can have Apache 2 parts in AGPL'd software https://github.com/pretix/pretix/blob/master/LICENSE
15:24:30 <Siren[m]> Linux kernel (GPL) also has some parts necessary for writing kernel modules licensed under Apache 2
15:25:41 <Siren[m]> s/Apache/more/, s/2/permissive licenses./
15:27:21 <boog900[m]> The database 
15:27:34 <boog900[m]> I did everything else 
15:32:04 <boog900[m]> I'll at least change all the parts I wrote to MIT 
15:34:59 <Siren[m]> I think you should license the  daemon under GPLv3 and keep the libraries MIT
15:35:06 <Siren[m]> * I think you should license the daemon under GPLv3 and keep the libraries MIT
15:35:44 <Siren[m]> So at least the daemon source must be available to the users who run it
15:36:53 <boog900[m]> Siren[m]: Surly this won't actually help as all the complex bits will be MIT, how much would you want licensed under GPL
15:38:54 <Siren[m]> boog900[m]: It would help because most end users won't be dealing with the libraries. I'd prefer the binaries (daemons and RPC servers) to be GPL.
15:39:24 <boog900[m]> I'll probably rewrite the database if synthetic bird doesn't return 
15:41:31 <Stnby[m]> How bout Apache 2.0?
15:42:48 <Siren[m]> kayabanerve[m]: Prevention of proprietary software of course. I don't want proprietary wallets etc that ship with modified versions of these.
15:44:40 <Siren[m]> kayabanerve[m]: > <@kayabanerve:matrix.org> ... except
15:44:40 <Siren[m]> > 1) Wallets would use monero-serai which is MIT
15:44:40 <Siren[m]> > 2) Even if a wallet wanted a piece of Cuprate, it'd be via a lib. You said libs MIT
15:44:40 <Siren[m]> They may include proprietary daemons.
15:45:38 <Siren[m]> kayabanerve[m]: I'm not a fan of this either but too late for everyone to collective agree and change that
15:48:59 <Siren[m]> It's AGPL
15:52:13 <Siren[m]> spirobel[m]: Yes and with AGPL that is the case
15:52:22 <Siren[m]> Stop misleading people with CLAs and stuff
15:52:30 <Siren[m]> That's completely unrelated to AGPL
15:54:03 <Siren[m]> Here is a quick recap of the terms for anyone who isn't familiar with AGPL. https://choosealicense.com/licenses/agpl-3.0/
15:54:53 <Siren[m]> There isn't much difference between AGPL and GPL other than usage over the network terms.
15:55:31 <woodser[m]> I'd generally support MIT over AGPL from my limited understanding
15:56:57 <Siren[m]> spirobel[m]: It doesn't matter what license you choose, you can still write good code. The end user and the ecosystem gets affected.
15:58:25 <boog900[m]> <plowsof11> "boog900: make it agpl and..." <- I do want to change it to MIT though 
16:00:18 <Siren[m]> maybe syntheticbird will reply to you eventually
16:02:58 <woodser[m]> btw haveno's backend license is AGLP (from bisq), but the ui which the ccs covered is under Apache 2.0
16:03:17 <Siren[m]> spirobel[m]: That most likely is not possible since he didn't use his legal full name in there
16:03:31 <Siren[m]> he won't be able to prove he is syntheticbird that far into the future
16:03:41 <Siren[m]> doesn't mean that this risk should be taken
16:05:33 <Siren[m]> it seems like a small component so rewriting it should not be an issue if you wanna go with a non-compatible license
16:08:44 <Siren[m]> you will not have legal issues or need to have a career in that
16:08:59 <Siren[m]> Just to be clear I don't really care what license you use at the end of the day as long as it's copyleft. AGPL and GPL are strong and necessary tools for software freedom. I don't like misinformation to be spread about them.
16:13:39 <Siren[m]> spirobel: you still haven't explained what you're doubting exactly. Even with MIT in case of license term violations, you will run into legal trouble.
16:13:49 <Siren[m]> Ownership terms are clear and precise
16:16:00 <Siren[m]> The current problems with Cuprate are not caused by the code being licensed under AGPL, it's a problem that is caused by wanting to do a license change on a component that has a maintainer that is no longer active.
16:17:27 <Siren[m]> You couldn't change it if it were MIT either
16:17:35 <Siren[m]> or Apache 2.0
16:17:39 <Siren[m]> or anything
16:32:57 <Siren[m]> spirobel[m]: And that's where you are wrong. It is absolutely possible to downgrade from AGPL to MIT if all contributors agree. It doesn't matter if it gets less or more restrictive. License changes are possible whenever all contributors collectively agree on it.
16:33:56 <Siren[m]> well don't just lie about a license then lmao
16:34:04 <Siren[m]> some things here are just out of ass
16:35:28 <Siren[m]> spirobel[m]: This has nothing to do with AGPL specific licensing terms. This is how copyleft licenses work, period.
16:38:23 <woodser[m]> my understanding is MIT will let people do whatever they want with the code, so there is no liability with the state, whereas AGPL introduces the possibility for legal action to be taken against people
16:38:42 <Siren[m]> that is so wrong lmao
16:40:06 <woodser[m]> them and anyone else can "steal" it and brand it however they want. it's all open
16:42:24 <woodser[m]> and if they don't, they are subject to state intervention
16:42:24 <Siren[m]> You can get sued by violating MIT terms, AGPL/GPL only offers stronger protection for the maintainer against patent trolls etc.
16:42:24 <Siren[m]> Both licenses have no warranty and liability terms.
16:42:24 <Siren[m]> https://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit/
16:42:24 <Siren[m]> https://choosealicense.com/licenses/gpl-3.0/
16:42:31 <Siren[m]> s/by/for/
16:43:23 <Siren[m]>  * You can get sued for violating MIT terms, AGPL/GPL only offers stronger protection for the maintainer against patent trolls etc.
16:43:23 <Siren[m]> Both licenses have no warranty and liability terms.
16:43:23 <Siren[m]> https://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit/
16:43:23 <Siren[m]> https://choosealicense.com/licenses/agpl-3.0/ or https://choosealicense.com/licenses/gpl-3.0/
18:45:47 <bridgerton[m]> <Abo Gemaal el-Folani 👑> Uh oh, you used an ad hominem so your argument is invalid
18:45:47 <bridgerton[m]> My genuine reaction: ⚔️🩸⚰️
20:21:24 <zadec> will i be able to follow the community meeting from my hexchat irc client? or do i need a matrix id?  
21:28:12 <RavFX[m]> test
22:52:18 <RavFX> test2
22:53:13 <nioc> both failed
22:54:54 <RavFX> test3
22:56:39 <RavFX> Message go from IRC->Matrix sometime (at least right now it work)
22:56:57 <RavFX> Other direction (Matrix->IRC) is *not* working
22:59:45 <nioc> RavFX: I saw your matirx message, some people get thru to IRC while others don't
23:00:19 <nioc> matrix says they are working on it, maybe by 2024
23:01:17 <RavFX> I did not see my Matrix->IRC test1, isnt IRC supposed to broadcast all message to all the people in the same room?
23:01:44 <RavFX> I did not see any of the message I typed on Matrix
23:08:06 <nioc> I only saw your "test" message
23:08:52 <nioc> for days I have missed all of plowsof's messages