Chewy7324

It's more about the ability for such apps to exist. Other apps include Tachiyomi (manga reader) and similar apps that are not allowed because of the app stores terms of service.

Hopefully Apple will soon be forced to allow such apps to exist outside of their store. Freedom to install what I want is a main reason I switched back from an iPhone to a Pixel with GrapheneOS.

Some people (including me) care about software freedom. The ability to fork and redistribute software while continuing to publish any changes to the code is great.

Not using an open source license but a source available license is not something that I like to see, but it's their right to do so. There're enough open source YouTube frontends like NewPipe and LibreTube.

PS: What I really don't like is them using the term open source. Open source is a well known term that's well defined. Source available describes exactly what this app is without implying the freedoms associated with open source.

https://opensource.org/osd/

Forcing all derivatives work to be non-commercial is incompatible with being open source.

https://opensource.org/osd/

Though I agree that they can already prevent usage of their app name with trademark laws.

The term "open source" generally refers to the definition by the Open Source Initiative.

https://opensource.org/osd/

Not allowing publishing of modified source code is in violation with the criteria of open source.

Thanks for the example! I had hoped Bitwarden wouldn't break older servers so quickly. Luckily it seems like vaultwarden released a new working version 7 days before, the clients broke older servers. I'll definitly check my new release notifications for vaultwarden right now.

They probably won't break compatibility with Vaultwarden on purpose since that'd also break their own server implementation. Bitwarden would have to ensure that all selfhosted servers are up to date before pushing a breaking auto update. This likely means enough time for vaultwarden to catch up.

Few things hurt a company providing critical software more than breaking users access without notice.

The passwords would still be accessible through the webui anyway.

Edit: If your not comfortable it's better to not use it. Password manager are critical and have to be trusted.

A friend of mine still used PolyMC since they didn't hear about the drama. Now they know and switched to Prism Launcher.

It's the same with people still using MultiMC, since many people just don't know Prism Launcher has more active development. Or they don't care.

I've been using Kodi (LibreELEC) on an RPi as a media center for the tv. It is extensible with IPTV etc which makes it great as a standalone device.

For myself I'm using Jellyfin on multiple devices without having to manage metadata and configuration seperately. It's all on my homeserver.

tl;dr
Different use cases.

You're right, I just looked up the numbers. Depending on the statistic, Germany isn't even in the top 10.

The full section G (except iii):

G. Restrictions on Use of Content and Services

You may not use the Content and Services for any purpose other than the permitted access to Steam and your Subscriptions, and to make personal, non-commercial use of your Subscriptions, except as otherwise permitted by this Agreement or applicable Subscription Terms. Except as otherwise permitted under this Agreement (including any Subscription Terms or Rules of Use), or under applicable law [1] notwithstanding these restrictions, you may not, in whole or in part, copy, photocopy, reproduce, publish, distribute, translate, reverse engineer, derive source code from, modify, disassemble, decompile, create derivative works based on, or remove any proprietary notices or labels from the Content and Services or any software accessed via Steam without the prior consent, in writing, of Valve.

You are entitled to use the Content and Services for your own personal use, but you are not entitled to: (i) sell, grant a security interest in or transfer reproductions of the Content and Services to other parties in any way, nor to rent, lease or license the Content and Services to others without the prior written consent of Valve, except to the extent expressly permitted elsewhere in this Agreement (including any Subscription Terms or Rules of Use); (ii) host or provide matchmaking services for the Content and Services or emulate or redirect the communication protocols used by Valve in any network feature of the Content and Services, through protocol emulation [2], tunneling, modifying or adding components to the Content and Services, use of a utility program or any other techniques now known or hereafter developed, for any purpose including, but not limited to network play over the Internet, network play utilizing commercial or non-commercial gaming networks or as part of content aggregation networks, websites or services, without the prior written consent of Valve; [...]

First of all I'm not a lawyer, so don't take any of the following seriously.

[1] is interesting, because in many jurisdictions some of the mentioned restrictions are allowed, so they can be safely ignored. E.g. reverse engineering programs running on your own device is legal in the EU [3].

At [2] Valve writes it is forbidden to:

emulate or redirect the communication protocols used by Valve in any network feature of the Content and Services, through protocol emulation

I don't know exactly what they mean with "Content and Services", do they include the game itself with this statement? Steam games usually have a SDK from Valve in them, so probably yes.

Protocol redirection has to be allowed else they could go after routers etc. But they specifiy "protocol emulation", which is how goldberg works if I understand correctly. The reverse engeering of the protocol is probably allowed, if it is done purely by observation.

I really have no idea if the restriction on emulating protocols is legal. Though if it was illegal I bet Nintendo would have already gone after Switch emulators.

Luckily there aren't any lawsuits against emulators since that could set a bad precedent for the entire software industry. A similar bad case was Oracle v. Google on Java, which luckily was in favor of Google (not sure I'd ever say that ;D).

And if someone doesn't agree to the terms of service since they don't use Steam, they might be in the clear. Obviously they'd have to obtain a copy of the game, which would most probably be illegal.

[3] https://www.vidstromlabs.com/blog/the-legal-boundaries-of-reverse-engineering-in-the-eu/

Valve probably includes the clause about removing games from your library because of illegal games (for whatever reason, e.g. someone uploaded without being the rightholder) and malware. If a developer turns evil it makes sense to remove the game and the developer from the platform. Usually if a game is no longer sold because of licences running out (car games, ...), Valve keeps the games in the library of people who already bought it, since the licence covers it.

I judge companies according to their (probable) track record. Valve has been great for the most part and I don't see it changing for the forseeable future with GabeN in charge. If the company changes ownership (going public, getting bought etc) I'm definitly going to be more careful and backup the games. Thanks to Goldberg they can still be played even if Steam was shutting down.

Sorry for the big wall of text, I'm just reading and trying to collect my thoughts and understanding of the matter. It's a great question though. If you've read it actually through I'm glad if you can point out any errors or add any thoughts. As I said, I'm a layman.

It was posted on some community maybe two months ago. I'm not sure which one.

It's still surprisingly low. At the local university around 20% of computer science students are women.

It's probably this combined with the overall lower amount of women on internet forums compared to men.

I really hope this changes as it's always better to have a more diverse group of people.