That’s kind of the point though, isn’t it?

If I were to post with “Extend the plank!” there’s a near zero chance that even fans of the movie, or even the franchise, I’m thinking of will get the movie right. If I instead say “Who am I to argue with the Captain of the Enterprise” a normie might guess Star Trek, a true nerd and fan of the franchise will peg that instantly as from Star Trek Generations

Edit: That said, there are several lines in this thread that aren’t necessarily only recognizable to fans or people familiar with the movie, but instead just pop culture references.

You don’t. In C everything gets referenced by a symbol during the link stage of compilation. Libraries ultimately get treated like your source code during compilation and all items land in a symbol table. Two items with the same name result in a link failure and compilation aborts. So a library and a program with main is no bueno.

When Linux loads an executable they basically look at the program’s symbol table and search for “main” then start executing at that point

Windows behaves mostly the same way, as does MacOS. Most RTOS’s have their own special way of doing things, bare metal you’re at the mercy of your CPU vendor. The C standard specifies that “main” is the special symbol we all just happen to use

I’d argue the two aren’t as different as you make them out to be. Both types of projects want a functional codebase, both have limited developer resources (communities need volunteers, business have a budget limit), and both can benefit greatly from the development process being sped up. Many development practices that are industry standard today started in the open source world (style guides and version control strategy to name two heavy hitters) and there’s been some bleed through from the other direction as well (tool juggernauts like Atlassian having new open source alternatives made directly in response)

No project is immune to bad code, there’s even a lot of bad code out there that was believed to be good at the time, it mostly worked, in retrospect we learn how bad it is, but no one wanted to fix it.

The end goals and proposes are for sure different between community passion projects and corporate financial driven projects. But the way you get there is more or less the same, and that’s the crux of the articles argument: Historically open source and closed source have done the same thing, so why is this one tool usage so wildly different?

The conspiracy theory isn’t that the automotive industry makes them look bad, it’s the rail owners.

Real: Amtrak doesn’t own any rails, they lease them and legally are supposed to have right of way on tracks unless the owner/operators of the rail currently have their own train that’s too big for the bypasses.

Conspiracy: Rail owners make Amtrak experience so painful that it drives down usage so Amtrak runs fewer and fewer trains, so they can be less of a nuisance to them or outright get rid of the service line and they get to completely ignore Amtrak

I hadn’t thought of that before, and I can think of several characters who’ve said things I doubt the writers would want attributed to them. I just want to see quotes from fiction being clearly labeled as such, and not using the grandiose of a character’s title to add weight to the quote.

For example when I see people quote Admiral William Adama on how when the military becomes the police, the people become the enemy of the state. That was Ron Moore writing a character for a show set in a post apocalyptic universe where the only survivors are hanging out on military ships, not a real world seasoned officer’s opinion. Is it an interesting point worth discussing? Sure, but I’m not putting it in the same category of 5-Star General Dwight Eisenhower’s warnings about the military industrial complex

Props to you for actually attributing the quote to the writer and not the character. It’s a pet peeve of mine when people take profound sounding quotes and attribute it to a fictional character that never existed, never had real thoughts or opinions of their own

Lol yup, got the idea from a Technology Connections video on how one of the common humidifier designs are literally just large swamp coolers

I’ve taken to using an old cake pan, a desk fan, and a towel. Fill up the pan with water, stick one end of the towel in the water, drape and clip the other end to the fan and let it sit running for a few days. Before the towel gets gross, toss it in the laundry when it’s dry and grab another towel

It works so well I’m completely confused as to how/why there isn’t a commercialized product like that, it completely solves the cleaning/highschool biology experiments problem

They mean they’re looking at what laws the guy may have broken, not exclusively 1A. Probable cause gives cops a limited ability to arrest and ask questions later, and public nuisance laws absolutely are a thing.

It should be noted that stadium security initially held him, but the police did not detain him, and have not charged with him a crime because he did not commit one.

Sauce for that last part

Edited cause Sync messed up the link

I’m curious as to what the worst one is. GIMP is pretty bad, KiCAD has pronunciation problems, nothing else is coming to mind

Did you not understand anything I typed out?

LMG used GN material, yes.

LMG did not commit plagiarism

LMG did not violate copyright law

Words have meanings, and by the definitions of the words plagiarism and copyright LMG does not meet the criteria. You and I do not get to change the definitions to fit whatever narrative we have in our heads on who we want to be the good guys and who we want to be the bad guys

That is not what plagiarism means

Oxford English Dictionary

The action or practice of taking someone else’s work, idea, etc., and passing it off as one’s own

Merriam-Webster

to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own : use (another’s production) without crediting the source

Dictionary.com

an act or instance of using or closely imitating the language and thoughts of another author without authorization and the representation of that author’s work as one’s own, as by not crediting the original author

All three definitions clearly state that Plagiarism is taking some production of someone else’s and claiming it as your own. That there is some kind of deception going on as to who created the original thought/work. Merriam-Webster’s definition has that second component talking about the act of using without crediting the source, which LMG didn’t do at first but later added a pinned comment. While not immediate and the barest amount of effort on LMGs part, but it still is credit.

Plagiarism has no legal component to its definition.

Copyright does have legal implications as it is someone’s right to duplicate a work. In general a creator of a work has exclusive rights to reproduce it, but there are exceptions (everyone’s favorite Fair Use laws). With LMG being Canadian the legal side is more complicated but in US courts it’s been tested that one such exception is around additional commentary and that the usage of the work was limited as to what was relevant to being actively discussed (big case here being H3H3 a few years back). Even by GN’s own admission the WAN show was taking phrases and repeating them verbatim, but just that, only phrases. Ones pertaining directly to the on hand topic of EVGAs ending partnership with Nvidia. They were not showing GNs video, reading his script word for word start to finish. Again, IANAL but I find it highly unlikely that a US or Canadian court would say that what LMG did on WAN Show meets the definition of a copyright violation

Edit:

And to answer your last point directly, Plagiarism and Copyright are orthogonal to each other. You could plagiarize by not giving public credit but still get copy permission from the copyright holder. Semantically kinda weird to think about

I took Linus’s statement to mean that he doesn’t understand why he is continuing to get heat from GN since they have addressed the issues GN pointed out.

The could sue but won’t part I think it’s coming more from a context with the ongoing Honey lawsuit, since at least on WAN show its been brought up several times that people recommend LMG join the lawsuit and Linus repeatedly refusing because as he puts it, he’s not a litigious person. Given the rest of the his plea in that segment for the viewers to not go after GN, I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on it. I also personally give a lot of leeway to people and organizations who have admitted mistakes in the past and corrected them so that definitely feeds into me choosing not to interpret things the way you are, even though I can see why you view it that way.

And yeah the dedicated clips channel video was moronically named imho. Linus or someone else at LMG should have vetoed it, it’s a serious topic and deserves to be taken as such. If they felt the need to make a joke, do it like the “channel this angry energy into powering RTX 5090s”. A small quip at the end, not leading into things

Are we talking copyright or plagiarism here? GN is claiming plagiarism, not copyright infringement

Edit: spelling

I’m not sure these are the receipts GamersNexus believes them to be. They’re all kinda stretching things into a gray area.

The plagiarism part is straight up incorrect. LMG did not say that their discussion was original reporting. The WAN show is explicitly a podcast reacting to news articles and events (WAN = Weekly Analysis and News). Plagerism needs a “passing off as your own” piece, while IANAL given react content typically ends up in the fair use category because of additional commentary and thoughts being added, the WAN show doesn’t have to disclose sources. Usually on WAN show they mention where they heard of the story, and not mentioning GN is a dick move, but it’s not plagiarism.

The history of not following up on issues was definitely better addressed in the original GN video. But at the same time, this just makes it seems like GN is trying to use the argument “Hey we warned you once that some of your methodologies aren’t great and led to skewed results and you didn’t really react, so now we’re gonna release an hour long video on all of your previous fuck ups and not tell you, k thx bi*”

To Linus’s original point on not getting a heads up, that’s not industry standard behavior and also kind of a dick move.

The unprofessional communication part I can go either way with. Would I talk to my boss like that? No. Technical mentors and peers that I had a good relationship with? Absolutely and I have done it. By the book it’s unprofessional it’s hardly the damning statements Gamers Nexus is trying to sell them as.

Also for those of you who have not watched any LMG content since that original GN video, LMG has cleaned up their act quite a bit, so credit where credit is due. Linus also only asked for receipts since he was getting increasingly frustrated with several negative comments coming from GN whereas on the LMG side they’ve continued to praise and recommend GN content

The real metric is dollars per second of destroyed hardware ;)

I once watched an engineer blow up a $200k prototype with a terminal alias.

Heh, I guess this shows my corporate software dev experience. Whenever I’ve taught git workflows it was always paired with a work ticketing system where any changes you were making were ideally all one single set of changes. If you need a feature or bug fix someone else was doing that was being done on another branch which you could pull into your code early and for tracking purposes we always made sure the other person merged into main first. The only time I’ve seen per line manipulation with git was when someone made a ton of changes in a file and wanted to revert a handful of lines.

Everything else you mentioned I’ve had a web git host like gitlab or bitbucket for, but I kinda put that more into peer review workflow than git itself

That is the one use case I’ve seen where a gui is absolutely faster.

In my line of work, I primarily work on embedded systems or process automation so any new files in the repo directory either need to be added for tracking or to the ignore file. I’m not saying it will never happen, but at least in my experience it happens so rarely that I always try to teach command line when possible

Linus Sebastian enters the chat

Every time I mentor a dev on using git they insist so much on using some GUI. Even ones who are “proficient” take way longer to do any action than I can with cli. I had one dev who came from SVN land try and convince me that TortoiseGit was the only way to go

I died a little that day, and I never won her over to command line despite her coming to me kinda regularly to un-fuck her repository (still one of the best engineers I ever worked with and I honestly miss her… Just not her source control antics)