It’s an anti commercial license. The thought is that, they don’t mind if people copy their comments, save them, re use them, etcetera, they just don’t want people to make money off of them, likely this is a response to AI companies profiting off of user comments

However I’m not sure if just linking the license without context that the comment itself is meant to be licensed as such would be effective. If it came down to brass tacks I don’t know if it would hold up.

Instead they should say something like

‘this work is licensed under the CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license’

I’m also not sure how it works with the licenses of the instance it’s posted on, and the instances that federate with, store and reproduce the content.

This is a joke right? I really really hope that they aren’t trusting randoms to know how to manage a gpg key properly.

It’s hard enough to get people actually interested in it to do it correctly.

And using gpg to constantly identify yourself would mean needing to keep multiple copies of your private key all over the place. I find it unlikely that regular people are issuing new keys and revocation certs properly. Not to mention having canonical key servers (maybe the government could manage that, but the individual is responsible for maintaining a way to get the canonical most up to date key)

Using gpg backfires because if you lose access to the key or it’s compromised (say by putting it on your phone) you lose everything. They work for people who know what they are doing because you are supposed to issue keys for specific tasks and identities, but there is just no way that that is happening.

Well an uppercase ASCII char is a different char than its lowercase counterpart. I would argue that not differentiating between them is an arbitrary rule that doesn’t make any sense, and in many cases, is more computationally difficult as it involves more comparisons and string manipulations (converting everything to lower case).

And the result is that you ultimately get files with visually distinct names, that aren’t actually treated as distinct, and so there is a disconnect from how we process information and how the computer is doing it.

‘A’ != ‘a’, they are just as unequal as ‘a’ and ‘b’

Edit: I would say the use case is exactly the same as programming case sensitivity, characters have meaning and capitalizing them has intent. Casing strategies are immensely prevalent in programming and carry a lot of weight for identifying programmers’ intent (properties vs backing fields as an example) similar intent can be shown with file names.