Presumably they want to keep the project liberally licensed modulo the "no evil" part. A source-available license would probably be too restrictive for that purpose unless it is somehow made compatible with open/free licenses. But I am not a lawyer, so I have no fucking idea what I'm talking about.
It's literally the MIT license with an added clause of only using the software for good, not evil.
Obviously, corporate attorneys will advise not to use the software since good and evil aren't really well defined legal terms. It's also not open source using the osi definition.
I think you should also understand that HN is not best place for this kind of news. This is page for people posting very obscure and hacky things. People that try to squeeze miliseconds on everything they do or do things the clever way. Why we should be happy for something that is the antitesis of clever and basically could be called corpo-slop?
> People that try to squeeze miliseconds on everything they do or do things the clever way. Why we should be happy for something that is the antitesis of clever and basically could be called corpo-slop?
I use fastmail for long time and this move is not good. Instead of investing into TB for example, they do Electron bloatapp... Will for sure never touch that thing
Why should Fastmail invest in Thunderbird, an open-source email client run by a completely unrelated organization? Of course they could, out of good will. But you can't demand that they do.
This is just their webapp wrapped in an off-the-shelf browser engine. Hardly any development resources needed. It could have been quickly put together to tick a checkbox for some big client, the revenue from whom could help them work on features that actually matter more. None of us needs to use it. But somebody must have needed it, so here it is.
> Why should Fastmail invest in Thunderbird, an open-source email client run by a completely unrelated organization?
One very good reason is that Fastmail created the JMAP protocol and while work on getting it into Thunderbird started several years ago, it hasn’t progressed. So JMAP is kinda stuck (obviously Microsoft is not going to put it in Outlook).
It could’ve been a win-win-win for JMAP, Fastmail and Thunderbird to accelerate the implementation and support for JMAP within Thunderbird. This would/could help in JMAP adoption by other mail providers too.
> Why should Fastmail invest in Thunderbird, an open-source email client run by a completely unrelated organization? Of course they could, out of good will.
It's likely cheaper to submit self-serving patches than to build and maintain your own email client.
KI multi-step asisstant. Being able to try out all the llms in one subscription. Search integration with Kagi which means AI can really search only pages I want. And my settings for search as well.
I AM using it for a long time, its brilliant but as any ai can hallucinate. Joining 4 separate technical topics about 4 different companies and initiatives is funny but misleading. Wont go back though - HN+Kite is all I do.
Nice, saying that you are going to report them always works. It helped me to finally close Revolut account, something "you cannot do without an app installed and giving more data to them first"
You call a pdf,converted from google sheet, with some random number, product name and price an invoice? This is kids scamming on taxes, they do not want to be catched and Stripe do not care as long as they get paid they share. That is whole US lately, fck regulations and make money.
In the US, you are required to pay taxes on your income. If the IRS takes an interest in you and you are not able to prove in court that you properly paid taxes on the income you turned into your assets, they will take all your money.
None of this has anything to do with the format of any invoices. If you wrote a receipt on a piece of toilet paper, that's fine as long as you can prove that you then sent 30-50% of the money you received to the US government. I believe this is more generally a feature of common law legal systems which prioritize honest intentions over box-checking.
Whatever other requirements exist in other countries are not really a US business's concern, unless those countries start turning their merchandise away at the border. In any case, expecting a random payment processor to act as world paperwork policeman for the EU is hilariously ridiculous.
