I attended the EDPB event on #PayorOkay models and left deeply concerned. The discussion lacked acknowledgment of data protection as a fundamental right and ignored clear GDPR principles making the model unlawful. Instead, it conflated ads with core services, sidelining fairness and rights. Surveillance ads harm individuals and society, yet their ‘value’ is overstated. We must reclaim the debate: data protection is key to human dignity and a rights-respecting digital future.
I think that with a pid and an oprion to automatically demonize (sysv way, doible fork, setsid, detaching from the terminal...) it would be trivial to run snac on a shared hosting even if it doesn't support fastcgi: you just need a script to start it.
Hi, I managed to build a statically linked #snac with musl (and zlib, curl and openssl).
Now I realized that I could deploy it as a FastCGI, but I wonder how I could stop a running process on snac update.
Is there a kill switch one could toggle eg by creating an empty file with a specific name under the data dir? Or maybe a version file that is periodically checked by snac processes that exit() when you start a new version?
Or maybe something even simpler I'm missing?
Also, I've read that snac now support unix domain sockets, but I can't find anything about that in the doc... where should I look?
proxy_media
boolean field to server.json
to true.strict_public_timelines
option introduced in the previous release now works correctly.It's not.
It's a stance OSI got by its sponsors https://opensource.org/sponsors
Meta in particular was allowed to cancel other teams' votes.
The issues have been reported by several people for months (here a recap https://discuss.opensource.org/t/list-of-unaddressed-issues-of-osaid-rc2/650 ) but OSI ignored them, silenced or censored those people.
See Julia Ferraioli's account of the co-design process: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/juliaferraioli_opensource-opensourceai-osi-activity-7256687721182605313-_wpd
If you feel disgusted as I do, here an initiative to restore (and _maybe_ improve) the OSD through public discussion and IETF rough consensus https://opensourcedefinition.org/wip/
@knowprose @sj Thanks for sharing this, it's good to know there's a sizable community that is unhappy with how OSAID got rolled out.
@sj @jaredwhite Through LinkedIn, I got invited to this discussion area regarding the topic... So I'm passing it along.
I haven't had enough contiguous time yet to chime in, but I will.
*Dusts off penguins and Gnus*
Actually C without _any_ allocation is quite simple and secure.