Gravitywell.xYz

I was thinking of both tastic and core, but i wasnt aware core had a closed source app. The only paywalled limitation seems to be using that specific mobile app to manage repeaters remotely, meshcore-cli has no such arbitrary limitations.

Mainly my point is that as long as the protocol is open nothing is stoping someone elss from creating a version that removes any paywalled limitations.

I dont know if maybe there are premiun features with some apps but so far as i know the meshcore app is free as well, if it was to be paywalled the oldest non paywalled version would still work and most people probably wouldnt upgrade, its not like with a phone or other manufacturer locked device that can force upgrades and prevent downgrades, if a new update gets released and paywalls old festures most people would just not update.

I could totally see some unofficial third party clients or things with improvements being paywalled by smaller groups or individual devs, but as a whole i dont think it would affect users ability to use the network.

I could see newer features and improvements being paywalled in theory but i dont think it would be profitable to actively lock out older/free users. Anything too enshittifiying would either be ignored by most users or cracked and removed.

Its certainly a valid fear in general these days but given the target audience of meshtastic is at least in part a lot of off-the-grid, diy sort of folks, i dont think enshittification would get very far.

Im now getting into meshcore after having been playing with meshtastic for about a year, i plan to run nodes for both. If a third thing comes along ill probably run that too but so far im not aware of anything notable.

What are the odds the classic “expertsexchange” ends up out lasting stack exchange?

apt install zram-tools

My first phone let me connect AIM and gave me a month of unlimited messages, the second month though, it was like $300 because aim just went over sms, that was an expensive lesson.

I dont think its a huge leap to think artists would rather you be able to buy their music once and make a $ instead of stream it from a sevice that pays them next to nothing.

They tried to fuck me on a return once and after a month of it sitting in limbo i filed and won a dispute though my card provider instead.

Matter of fact i think it was over ram too, but it was over a year ago.

Well if you genuinely care about seeing artists get paid the ones who need it most tend to make their conent available already for free on bandcamp or similar services, and have physical albums and merch you can buy.

Last night i spent $10 on 3 albums on bandcamp, those artists each made more on that single purchase then they would from thousands of streams.

Spotify making less (or more) money does not trickle down to artists on a per stream basis.

Dont be a corporate bootlicker. Say it with me now, "If buying isnt owning Piracy is not stealing. "

Its mostly Sony, UMG, and all the other leeches who would get paid less for their share holders.

I dont feel like editing the image but imagine the guy with most of the cookies in this picture was UMG and the artists are the guy on the right.