I really enjoyed the "Michael Hobbes Podcast Universe" this year. He's a reporter who is now making entertaining podcasts debunking claims in the media/zeitgeist. I appreciate that he takes a pragmatic approach -- to paraphrase something he said: "There's probably an impact on kids having so much screen time, but this data you're citing doesn't show what you're claiming."
Imagine my surprise that the company that posts "Collaboration sucks" and endorses a YOLO approach to decision making then has a security breach based on misconceptions of a GitHub action that was caught by security tools and could have been proven out via collaboration or a metered approach to decision making.
Babies. 8% of the patients under that category are Age 0
Edit: the full billing code is "Obstetric and gynaecological devices associated with adverse incidents" Billing code Y76 "describes the circumstance causing an injury, not the nature of the injury."
So injuring a baby during delivery with forceps would result in this code.
the carve out is weird and usually open-source does not say, no to the navy using it BUT, it's OK for DARPA ...
> Military Use: Use by or for any military organization or for any military purpose, including but not limited to projects sponsored or paid for by military organizations, or use by the U.S. Department of Defense (except for DARPA), U.S. Armed Forces, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. intelligence agencies, or any foreign counterparts of the foregoing.
Given the ambiguity of the phrase "military use" when the military does, in-fact, use it for things the military does - I am not confident in the slightest with Arduino's use of language here.
> Military Use: Use by or for any military organization or for any military purpose, including but not limited to projects sponsored or paid for by military organizations, or use by the U.S. Department of Defense (except for DARPA), U.S. Armed Forces, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. intelligence agencies, or any foreign counterparts of the foregoing.
Indeed. Also because any big organisation or corporation can both do evil and good. Often research projects with guarantees to release knowledge or some other improvements such as to software projects under a permissive licence.
i wrote the article, just go ahead and call me shady and leave out other people at the company. limor will be back online next week after recovering (just had a kid) and you can call her shady too.
But you did not sign the article? I don't understand this.
IMO it would have just been easier to simply sign it. (With signing I mean mentioning who specifically wrote a blog entry; and also ideally the time as well.)
those were previous blocks and a couple of banned people assumed it was that, it was not, and since then we mute and document blocks with our social team. regardless, a block from what, 4 years ago, hurt someone that bad, twitter really did hurt people.
Their definition of "the platform" in the TOS is verbose and has weird grammar. I can see how people came away with a different understanding.
> User shall not translate, decompile or reverse-engineer the Platform, or engage in any other activity designed to identify the algorithms and logic of the Platform’s operation, unless expressly allowed by Arduino or by applicable license agreements;
> The Site is part of the platform developed and managed by Arduino, which allows users to take part in the discussions on the Arduino forum, the Arduino blog, the Arduino User Group, the Arduino Discord channel, and the Arduino Project Hub, and to access the Arduino main website, subsites, Arduino Cloud, Arduino Courses, Arduino Certifications, Arduino Docs, the Arduino EDU kit sites to release works within the Contributor License Agreement program, and to further develop the Arduino open source ecosystem (collectively, the “Platform”).
I'm pretty sure that is the point. Legal ambiguity to say whatever they can vaguely in public but in court they will make it encompass the entire world.
