Ah sorry, I misunderstood completely, I didn’t read it right. For some reason I thought you were talking about the router / wifi service being SOWPL.

IANAL, but I feel that coffee shop case would not be different if the software were under AGPL… if you are providing a service to other people, even if “the other people” are the customers to your shop, it could be argued that under the terms of the AGPL (not to be confused with GPL) they should have the right to see the source of the service that they are making use of.

But if the SOWPL requirement really does apply to private code that isn’t providing service to others, the implication would be that even if you are the only user (no coffee shop customer), and even if you are the only one who knows about it, you would still need to make the source code public in some way… which I feel this is very impractical and probably unenforceable anyway.

Even if you did block it, the fact that you blocked it is also trackable… so it might actually single you out even more, and it’ll still allow them to fingerprint your browser (you can test your fingerprint here).

It might make more sense to randomize / spoof the data so that it becomes inconsistent and useless so that you aren’t identifiable.

it’s Stupid Man’s Maginot Line and in case of real attack will be broken effortlessly

The Maginot Line was not broken, it was avoided. The nazis were essentially forced to take a different route to reach France, through Belgium. The issue was that it gave the defenders a false sense of security and the alternate route was not well protected (they thought the rough terrain would be a deterrent). It was an error in strategy, but the line itself held.

Do we know if the idea is to really have only mines?

The article gives as example some razor wire reinforced fence area through the forest that’s likely gonna be targeted (the picture does not show what’s on the floor, but you can see the area has surveillance cameras too). I wouldn’t be surprised if the idea is to have some multi-layered protection, Surovikin-like, but of course the mines is what will break the news, since they could affect civilians the most.

alias lt='ls -t | less'

Good idea! I’ll steal that but I would rather be able to give a directory path as parameter (and show in colors, and don’t pause if less than 1 page of content, and support the scrolwheel), also piping ls forces it to be 1 single column so might as well show more details, personally I’m gonna use this instead:

lt() { ls -t --color=always -Fgoh "$@" | less -RF --mouse; }

Also, printf '\a' will output an alert bell character which should make the terminal beep/blink and be highlighted for attention by your wm/compositor if it’s unfocused.

I have that aliased to a to get notified whenever a long running command finishes just by adding ;a at the end.

Aren’t all motivations emotional?

I mean… what would be the “logical” reason to use FOSS? I feel you can’t just use pure logic as a form of motivation, ever. Something that only uses logic and not emotions cannot take any action like a computer algorithm made of pure logic with no hard-coded instincts that simply operates mathematically, in reality there’s no logical reason to act in one direction or another… morals/goals are always emotionally grounded.

I feel the problem has more to do with social reasons, and pragmatic reasons.

What determines a behavior being “extreme” often has more to do with what is the average behavior of the people you surround yourself with. It’s a relative term.

In a world where everyone used free software and saw that as the norm, with things being designed around software being free, someone going the extra mile just to use proprietary software would be seen as “extreme” too.

Also, I’m not convinced that the numeric balance of who killed the most from the other side in a war is what should determine who is in the wrong.