Joplin is more directly comparable. The apps are open source and it offers sync with all kinds of targets. It monetises through a source available sync server (i.e you can run your own but you arent allowed to run it commercially) hosted by Joplin (Joplin Cloud)
For transparency im directly involved with Joplin as a volunteer (less so in recent months admittedly) so yeah, im a bit biased.
I keep seeing so much stuff against .ml and I’m just like, I picked it because it was basically the only really active one when I first joined…
Its harder to remember not swimming to be honest. School swimming lessons, beach holidays, leisure centres, holidays abroad etc. I actually used to swim competetively (for my age bracket in my teenage years) for a local team. Went on to do lots of scuba diving and was a pool lifeguard for a bit
I think not swimming here is pretty rare, I want to say that maybe 10 or 15% of my year were classed as “non-swimmers” and had lessons separately to the rest.
That would be Forgejo. Codeberg is the hosting service which already existed running Gitea before it forked it and started developing it as Forgjo and moving to it from Gitea.
I was a bit surprised to see Kath in a meme so came straight to the comments…
I get that, its basically just going back to the model we had before with Teamspeak/Mumble/Ventrilo where the image is meant to be specifically about Federated alternatives/
That seems a little extreme. I would maybe agree if 1) it wasn’t being made by the guy who has already got an AGPL project in Pixelfed and 2) it was on open signups. Whilst software is invite-only or closed entirely I don’t really see a problem in it not being open-sourced.
I think in recent years the lines have been blurred but I would say Matrix is more “Discord-like” because it is account-centric rather than phone-centric and is designed more around communities than 1:1 IM’s to replace texting.
But Revolt isn’t federated is it? It wouldn’t fit here any more than signal.
The problem is the moment there is another instance then loops.video won’t even make sense as that is just the name of the instance and not the application.
Yup, its just called Loops, there is a download link once you log in for the APK directly or to the iOS testflight. (On a related note why does everything keep like this picture keep calling it “Loops.video” when it is just called “Loops”? - we don’t call it “Lemmy.ml”, “Mastodon.social” or “Peertube.tv”)
Heliboard which is an active fork of OpenBoard.
I thought I had heard about him making that before but no amount of searching seemed to find it… I guess thats why, I was thinking I had just made it up or something.
A few I’ve been interested in.
One I’m surprised I haven’t seen (although might inappropriate for the standard, no idea) is an activitypub messenging service like Matrix
The Brexit lies and their perpetrators are indelibly etched into my brain.
There is a difference between censorship and the right to not have to listen to somebody. Being banned from having a platform to speak from could count as censorship (for example being banned from Reddit). However with Lemmy those on lemmygrad are free to say whatever they want, the difference is that everyone else is just as free to not have to listen. The idea of the Lemmy instances is that they have the ability to curate content - an instance catering to an LGBT community is not going to want to have to listen to right wing evangelicals and you join up on that knowledge. If you want to have the option to hear every single voice then join an instance with that mindset or just host your own.
Never really had much of my Grandma’s food other than her Christmas fruit cakes. My Mum would only ever cook out of necessity and never anything fancy. It was my dad that did all the nice cooking in my house.
The moment you exclude any group or persons from your licence, it is, by definition, no longer open source.
Of course that doesn’t sit well with some people and there are some initiatives to try to account for that, for example the Hippocratic License that allows you to customise your licence to specifically exclude groups that might use your software to cause harm or the Do No Harm license with similar goals.
Honestly, I find it hard to object to the idea. Some might argue it is a slippery slope away from the ideals of software freedom (as has been the case with some of the contraversial licenses recently like BSL and Hashicorp. I’m not a hardline idealist in the same way and if these more restrictive licenses that restrict some freedoms still produce software that might otherwise not exist then I’m happy they are around.
Would I use one? Probably not, for me, whilst I like the idea, I think the controversy generated by using a non-standard licence would become its defining feature and would put off a lot of people from contributing to the project.
Pulsar because I am (or at least was and will be, I’ve been a bit absent recently) part of the team developing it. Its a fork of Atom to continue development after GitHub pulled the plug, entirely community developed and focused.