« first day (3337 days earlier)      last day (1760 days later) » 
01:00 - 13:0013:00 - 00:00

1:09 AM
IDK if spam:
A: 31.0.0 is not a valid SDK Version. Option are 26.0.0 Unversioned

Daggie BlanqxI experienced this problem today ; my Expo Android app brought this error after playstore updated this app. I resolved the problem by visiting apkpure.com and downloading Expo Android App of version 2.12 which supports SDK 31.0.0

Seems like a legit site?
I pulled it up on wikipedia too, but feels like a grayish site to me. Maybe totally legit. Maybe totally "don't trust it". IDK...
But I'm a little paranoid.
1:32 AM
Well it is a link only answer pretty much
and dosen't explain how getting a version off a third party site fixes anything
1 hour later…
2:40 AM
We aren't exactly giving it a very warm reception in general: stackoverflow.com/search?q=deleted%3Aall+apkpure&mixed=0
IDK if that's a good thing or a bad thing.
(I say that lest we allow the "the site is always right" principle to blindly govern the outcome.)
2:58 AM
@AaronHall I believe this was posted in good faith. The answer basically says to downgrade to 2.12.0 and provide one of the alternative sites to download APK (since you can't downgrade with Play Store). Removing the link is safe.
2 hours later…
4:38 AM
22 messages moved to Chimney
5:36 AM
@OptimusPrime show a "status"! If the site is up, show Up, if the site is down, show Down
6:15 AM
@rene Idea: submit a DMCA takedown for one of your own posts published before the license changeover, claiming that the license is violated as a result of it and thus you now hold all copyrights. See if SE takes it down or files a counternotice. Then, sue.
IP disputes are exempted from the arbitration agreement, so it doesn't go against it to sue (which is the next logical step if the hoster files a counternotice and it's invalid).
Yes, that sounds like time well spent, for all parties involved.
Also good for the relationship ....
@SonictheAnonymousHedgehog moot anyways if you opted out
I still think it's somewhat of a storm in a waterglass
I've opted out
Though I wouldn't likely be the one to do it.
You really wanna submit a DMCA notice to SE? They'd probably take down all your content and be done with it. Even if they don't and submit a counternotice, you'd have to actually sue which is 5 digit dollars at the least for the most basic case.
Let's crowdfund it ...
6:20 AM
1. I'm personally OK with re-licensing my contributions to 4.0. 2. As of version 2.0 of the CC licenses, derivative works can be re-licensed to higher versions. 3. To date, no one has pointed out any specific reasons why they disagree with their contributions being licensed under 4.0, and all the questions asked about it are just pedantic to me.
@Magisch If they rule in your favor, you'll be awarded court costs
I never cared to start, all my stuff is available under cc0 as well
my philosophy on copyright of private works is do whatever you want including using it with no attribution or what have you but I don't guarantee anything
SE will not sue anyone for breach of license on my behalf and I've resolved to never sue anyone for copyright infringement regardless of the circumstances so this whole shabang doesn't affect me in the least
I'd also like to point out that just because there have been no responses to questions about ads, the re-licensing, etc. it doesn't mean that they are completely ignoring them. It's possible (and I trust) that there are internal discussions taking place on how to respond to them, and they just haven't concluded yet.
But still, as Monica Cellio once pointed out, internal discussions mean nothing for the public record.
There is this Dutch saying: You better sit still while you're being shaved ... I think that strategy might work here as well.
that probably translates badly but I have the parrot fill in for me if needed, if not the glasses ...
@rene Never heard that one... Must be gender related XD
6:36 AM
@Tinkeringbell Make it "getting a haircut" and it's gender neutral
2 hours later…
8:15 AM
Good noon
8:30 AM
Hectic noon...
7 messages moved to Chimney
@MetaAndrewT. That's such a noon thing
8:58 AM
reads up
The CC version complaint questions will likely continue till 1. There's an answer
2. There's a canonical question and people start closehammering against it
3. There isn't but people are sick of it and do it anyway
4. People get bored and wander off.... which is hardly the best stratergy for the broader community but meh
also weekends are like
the worst time for this sorta thing.
DMCA-ing yourself is... kinda interesting...
I expect anyone who files a DMCA against SE to have their account suspended though
Especially if they indicate they want to take legal action
Lepitox, dammit!
Oh, the extra "t" sucks. Which flows better? You be the judge
9:05 AM
@Magisch uhm, suspended?
@Aibobot Who's i'M
More likely politely deleted
Hard deleted.
@JourneymanGeek made gone somehow
@M.A.R. nothing to see here, move along
9:07 AM
I'd assume it's a safe bet that if you take legal action or threaten to take legal action over stack's use of your contributions that they'd file removing you and your ability to contribute as a matter of due dilligence
@Magisch Well - possible account deletion I'd guess. The tricky thing is actually removing your contributions
but sueing SE is the nuclear backpack option
You could hurt SE, but you're likely to obliterate yourself too if the network actually means anything to you
@rene That's not possible. The Earth is rotating with the speed of kilometers per second.
Or you're one of those folks who sues people for fun, or profit
@JourneymanGeek I was gonna but now I'm squinting hard at your face
Its a fuzzy face
9:13 AM
@JourneymanGeek we have that here
people who will request some absurd accomodation at your business expecting you can't supply it or apply with an obvious kafka trap to sue for discrimination
@Magisch Well in theory...
If you ever wondered why it is a matter of policy to never give feedback on unsuccessful job applications, that is why
someone could make a new account, email in a waiver, post some random thing and...
but blah
that's not really good intent, its just being a bit of a d....
Don't you have to register a copyright before suing for copyright infringement? It's not as easy as that
actually I was under the impression that before a certain year that was the case
otherwise its automatic
9:15 AM
I'd imagine that suing through the keruffle and uncertainty of overlapping licenses is going to be rather fact specific and difficult and will probably cost a lot more then you get out of it, and even if you win iirc cost shifting isn't guaranteed
but you already gave SE a perpetual non exclusive licence....
which dosen't state what version of the CC licence
see this is why I wash my hands of the business completly
can't get stuck in unproductive license discussions if you use cc0
IANAL - but I studied a little practical legal stuff as a management and information security management major
@Magisch personally I don't really care.
there's much more important stuff I'd like SE to spend their time, effort and resources on
that is usually true for any involved party in any dispute about OSS licenses ever
@Magisch and there's a few edge cases anyway
So - is chat under the CC licence? There's a few rooms where conversations are supposed to be confidencial, and you are expected not to share them under CC
I've not bothered to look up what's the terms for say teams yet
I THINK there's a seperate TOS for that
9:23 AM
I think private chat rooms function under the ton of bricks theory of confidentiality
And the good old social contract
you can't be sued if you share from them but relevant people will come down on you like a ton of bricks if you do
IANAL though so what do I know
@Magisch and people will be mad at you
most people who use private chat rooms are mods and I imagine most mods have the straightforward common sense that this doesn't need to be explicitly spelled out
@Magisch not always true
Sometimes we can be idiots ;p
or worse
too clever
We're human like anyone else, we have interpersonal conflicts, we get frustrated
and we deal with stuff our own ways.
9:33 AM
That's a strange thing with licensing on SE (and other collaborative sites). AFAIK, your contribution is automatically copyrighted, but permit a license on SE. So, in a sense, it's still your own... or partially..? or...?
@MetaAndrewT. Well - you certainly have to licence it to SE for them to use it, and that bit is literally standard internet services boilerplate
but since you're licencing it, you're not assigning copyright
merely permitting SE to use it under specific conditions
Ah, I see my fault... I can't infringe a copyright of my own...
Well in theory...
There's a very convoluted set of circumstances where its probably possible
involving time travel
But to me, as a occational petty dabbler in the legal black arts and maybe even an armchair paralawyer...
the simplest way to look at it is
9:38 AM
@MetaAndrewT. you can't infringe on a copyright of your own but you can on a license of your own
for instance if I write a tool and sell an exclusive license for that tool to someone and then continue providing it to others
I've licenced my content to Stack Exchange Internet Services, perpetually and irrevocably under
"on a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive basis pursuant to Creative Commons licensing terms (CC-BY-SA)"
So the point of ambiguity here is whether the licence version matters when we talk about CC-BY-SA or not
Now if you want to confuse this...
for a legal contract to take place there needs to be a 'meeting of the minds'
So - the question might be, at the time that you agreed to this contract - was there a clear, explicit understanding that it would be under a specific version of the licence or otherwise
and whether that was a factor in you choosing to accept the contract
The fact that it says Creative Commons licensing terms (CC-BY-SA) could be reasonably interpreted as meaning any version
Reminded of DMCA on Anime.SE, since I don't see SE will counterclaim it.
(sorry, jumped to another topic, but still thinking if it's really possible to DMCA yourself)
@MetaAndrewT. which probably also comes down to "Do we have time time/resources to fight this?"
@MetaAndrewT. I'm more familiar with laws of the commonwealth ;p
Personally, I couldn't care less about my license to three lines of code being upgraded from CC-by 3 to CC-by 4. The concerns about SE putting itself in legal danger are legit, though.
@MetaAndrewT. in practice?
considering a ton of this is automated, its probably happening multiple times a week ;p
9:48 AM
May 31 '17 at 15:15, by JNat
@JasonC The content provider (SE) cannot contest the validity of the claim, and are required to take action unless the request is not properly formatted
wow, that's.. quite old
@MetaAndrewT. and this is fundamentally how the dmca is broken
Copyright laws suck. QED.
I abhor the concept of copyright tbh
ironically as I'm in a profession that relies on copyright
QED rules. It's a great manga.
No u rule
And I mean it to sting
9:57 AM
Sting also rules. Great music.
> Blocked ads:
21 on this page
Huh, OK.
Uhh, talking about ads on SE, they crashed my Chrome tabs after leaving for hours :/
Getting the cute "Aw, Snap!" page...
Oof, your Chrome got Thanos'd?
10:14 AM
I don't mind copyright
Just the whole idea of perpetual copyright + the willingness to step over other rights for it
Allowing a creator to profit from his work is good
problem is its turned into a way for companies to profit from the work of long gone creators in perpetuity
I very mind pasteright!
@MetaAndrewT. erf. Adblock man
10:37 AM
@JourneymanGeek eh. I think that has to be balanced against the public interest of being able to efficiently utilize resources and benefit from progress
@Magisch as opposed to just locking it up and throwing away the key ;p
Particularly in software while I see the business necessity for proprietary code my idealist self would like a world of open source only
the point of copyright ought to be to create an incentive to create new works and protect creators.
for everything. Sunlight is after all the best disinfectant
@Magisch open source relies on copyright
10:40 AM
lack of copyright wouldn't preclude open source
Well - open source is still a licence
and to be enforcable, you're basically licencing your rights as the copyright holder under those specific terms
FOSS is literally using copyright as intended to enable a creator to share his work with specific conditions
Which happen to include sharing changes to it
But open source licences are meaningless without robust copyright protection (IE the fear of being sued like has happened in germany) or actual desire to do the right thing
I don't like the conditions. They're only necessary because of the preclusive nature of copyright
@Magisch now, lets say you release something under the GPL
MS takes it, forks it, and refuses to release the code after the changes
I wouldn't need to have 5 paragraphs about all the rights im disclaiming if I didn't have to. I wouldn't need complicated derivative licensing stipulations if it wasn't a thing to begin with
without copyright you have no tools for recourse
Well, that's lawyers
10:45 AM
all of this fluff around OSS is borne of the necessity of copyright
and people pretending to be lawyers
@Magisch but how do you preserve the moral rights as a creator without copyright as a bludgeon? ;p
and crap, that's a loaded question
you dont
and that's not a function of copyright
I think the idea of moral creator rights is fundamentally poisonous to human progress
@Magisch I consider it natural
I own my works. I choose to share them freely where it makes sense
But they're still my own
Lets say I drew a picture
10:47 AM
I don't presume to own my works
everything that I am and can do is a product of my environment and the opportunities I've been given
That's deep bro
I own that message ^
Sep 14 '18 at 21:49, by rene
deep ...
I do not pretend to be an artist
Its mine
someone takes it and puts it on a T shirt and makes a crapload of money off it
I get ownership rights on physical things that can be taken away from me
I don't actually care about they money, but its still my time and effort
My bike is mine, I bought it and paid for it and if you take it I wouldn't have it anymore
But my code is not mine. If you copied it it would still run for the purpose I designed it on my machine
10:51 AM
@JourneymanGeek That is the coolest signature I've ever seen
@Magisch the code isn't just code
its your time and effort. Its your accrued knowledge
Well, the same goes for my ideas
it might even be your creativity
yeah but I still have those
So, you build a table.
10:52 AM
If you took my code and made a billion dollars from selling it that I was never going to, I still have everything I made for myself
the table is a physical object, but its also not just the wood its made out of
what turns the table into wood is the tangible effort
What turns your random banging on a keyboard (like what I'm doing now) into a useful tool has value
But in your analogy if I could copy the table as it is without any cost or effort on your side, and your table would still be there, does it matter?
@Magisch well - what makes a wood a table?
Designing it is a non zero effort - whether its something explicitly or implicitly designed
in the spirit of efficiency, why shouldn't you be able to reuse my effort
that's pretty much the 'software' behind the table, the code that gets fed into the hardware - whether human or otherwise
10:54 AM
at no additional cost of effort for me
@Magisch well, economically? That means the person who designed that table might starve
and no new table designs get created
Thats an inadequacy of our economy though, not a moral imperative
@Magisch now for a moral imperitive
I'm proud of a lot of stuff I've done
a little less so than I should be
Someone would starve, dude.
money aside - what drives someone to create
There's certainly the utility - but that gives no incentive to share
I can keep my table designs to myself
Or the stuff I've worked out on my wierd dinky little home server
10:56 AM
you can be proud of your work without preventing others from using it
@Magisch but I'm not - I'm choosing to share it freely
but the choice is an important thing here
some years back I wrote a minecraft plugin for a server I'm still proud about doing it even though it got remixed and rebranded by someone who made it his own while updating and all that
the choice to arbitrarily deny others the benefit?
I have no obligation to share it
That I share it means I derive some value from it
Actually its probably true of spending time here too - either as a regular user or a mod
just that value isn't necessarily tangible
And thats why moral rights to a work feel important to me
1 hour later…
12:10 PM
Wow... the chutzpah of some people
Yeah, but you'll have to work a little to do this. I'm afraid that you don't want to learn, but only to solve your assignment. In that case I cannot help you. My apologies for that, but I cannot make this clearer :) For sure that you'll be able to get an integer solution to this problem with the output of my five hours work. You appear as Senior Software Developer, but you seem not to be able to do anything with my output. My apologies again. — Luis Colorado 9 hours ago
12:23 PM
@Mgetz meh... flagged as unfriendly.
Enough of these and hopefully the (remaining) mod team will take proper action.
@ShadowTheCoffeeWizard we had some departures lately?
Yup, Yve and another mod.
Yve announced her departure, the other mod just disappeared.
@ShadowTheCoffeeWizard I'd prefer to have that comment kept
And likely others decreased their activity, according to what I read here.
@JohnDvorak what for? Mods can still see it, it's crap.
That's exactly the kind of comments that keep good people away from SO.
It's super patronizing.
"I know more than you, you know nothing!"
That's what it actually says.
With all the fires burning in/around SO we need all the good people inside, not kick them out.
it's not "I know more than you" but "I want you to show some effort"
12:31 PM
@JohnDvorak Seriously? That comment is basically "Well you call yourself a senior developer but you're acting like a uni-student, figure it out." It's about as dickish and unkind as you can get and not actually throw insults
It's candy coated crap, yeah.
@ShadowTheCoffeeWizard who was the other one?
@Magisch dunno, didn't bother to check.
@ShadowTheCoffeeWizard Any specific reason? Or just in the general wake of things
24 hours ago, by Olivia
I'm suspecting there's a second mod that has left (or he's at least considerably less visibly active, and has been since July)
Ask @Princess :)
oh, reason? The clash with users
Users don't like the changes, and blame the mod team.
e.g. now I saw newsletter became "digest" (???????) so I blame @Tink. ;)
12:36 PM
Seems like we'll have mod elections soon then
it's gonna be an unmitigated crapfest if we have mod elections in the current climate on mso
@Magisch This presumes anyone wants to run
meh, there are still enough mods
@Mgetz there are plenty of people willing to run not on MSO
Think some people here will be willing to do that.
cough @Bart cough
Worst case, Smokey can run for mod on SO. :D
He's awesome with nuking spam! :P
@ShadowTheCoffeeWizard then we would need to create an ai training bot for smokey called 'Bandit'
12:38 PM
That said, I'm interested to find out what effect the meta kerfuffle will have on candidate turnout
I predict the crapstorm will be in comments and general surrounding discussion, though
@Mgetz there was actual AI bot posting replies on SO in the past.
@Magisch This looks like a drop of activity
I wonder if now is the time to break my "most concurrently pending flags" personal record
@410 Bart's twin?! I'd never have guessed. :(
@ShadowTheCoffeeWizard Yes but did they use a pontiac firebird logo as their user image?
12:40 PM
Well, many mods have nearly zero visible activity on smaller sites.
@Mgetz nah
"Overall changes in design will not be made at this moment." Well, thanks for at least letting us know where you stand on that. I guess I can stop holding my breath for the Stack Overflow that I knew and loved to return. This isn't the site that I joined, helped build, and loved for so many years. It's no longer a site that I am proud to be associated with. I have recommended that my coworkers and others stop using it until such time as you decide to re-deploy a site that I am no longer ashamed to be associated with, one that does not hide content behind a paywall or ad banner. — Cody Gray ♦ Jun 29 at 0:35
@410 Paywall or adbanner!?
(one of its accounts, there were more)
@Mgetz How do you suggest to call that giant ugly thing on the front page for unregistered users?
12:44 PM
Yeah SE push us to use Teams; Teams cost money; Hence, paywall.
Aight, we should curb the speculation a bit out of respect for cody
@JohnDvorak yeah I had to open it up in a browser I don't have adblock and in a private window to see it
Gone are the days I would consider disabling adblock on SE
glad to hear that adblock kills that thing
@JohnDvorak don't actually know, let me check
Not the malware though
Q: Inappropriate "Ads by WGX" ad on Academia and History

RaidriReporting a highly inappropiate ad seen on Academia (and History). No link URL visible without clicking. This ad (or another on the page) also tried to open popups and new browser tabs. Please clean up the ads you serve.

12:46 PM
it does not
@JohnDvorak I unwhitelisted a while ago
I draw a hard line at external ad providers
I can't trust these as far as I can throw them, even considering the fact that I can't throw a company
You can browse them through a headless docker instance :D
You can throw a company party though. :D
!!/throw party
@ShadowTheCoffeeWizard No such command 'throw'.
@JohnDvorak I dislike docker
12:50 PM
@JohnDvorak sounds like horror movie
VMware then? Not sure that one supports headless instances, but you can at least slide the window below your taskbar
Docker and the Headless Instance
@ShadowTheCoffeeWizard sounds like the electropop version of Big head Todd and the Monsters
"headless" just means it has no graphics capability
@M.A.R. probably knows that movie.
@JohnDvorak hehe... I know. :D
!!/joke on @John
12:52 PM
stop that!
stop having that name!
invent some
I'll use it
uprego was nice
If you want new.... Judah!
uprego is in attic
It still starts with a J
12:55 PM
I'm Judah meanwhile
@Jud has a good sound
Hey @Jud
I like Judah.
Display name may only be changed once every 30 days; you may change again on Oct 5 at 19:28
I'm surely out of the room by then. Very very busy.
12:58 PM
You can change it once per month per site - and then cascade everywhere. Just don't tell anyone.
01:00 - 13:0013:00 - 00:00

« first day (3337 days earlier)      last day (1760 days later) »