Teddit - FLOSS Front-End Reddit
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires
https://github.com/teddit-net/teddit
In the same vein of Invidious and others, this time we have a FLOSS way to access Reddit. Still very early in development but it already works well.
I have tried and Privacy Redirect already allows you to manually write https://teddit.net in the Reddit redirector and it works like a charm!
The developer only accepts donations in BitCoin and Monero, so if you have those available consider giving him a push!
Sweet! It looks great. Reddit's new JS laden front-end is miserable (and, of course, freedom denying).
I am a translator!
Thanks. So which alternatives exist so far?
I know of these.
Instagram -> Bibliogram (not working?)
YouTube -> Invidious
Twitter -> Nitter
Reddit -> Teddit
Yes, those are the ones that exist right now.
Bibliogram is working, but each instance gets blocked every once in a while.
> alternatives
These are not properly speaking alternatives but better ways (in several respects) to access centralized services.
Distributed services are alternatives, in the sense that they do not require monopolistic central service providers any more and thus rebalance the power structure in favor of the users.
MediaGoblin, Peertube, Matrix, JitsiMeet, Jami are examples of alternatives (imho).
Yes, that would be a more correct approach to naming each one.
Still, as far as "Front-End" goes, the ones described above are the only ones I am aware of.
I am a translator!
Right I meant "alternative front-ends" or "alternative ways of accessing popular websites without running non-free software or without being tracked" instead of actual alternatives.
According to the Trisquel Community Guidelines [1], "FLOSS" is a misnomer [2] and should thus be avoided.
Teddit's license has recently been modified to AGPL3, so this is now a truly libre piece of software. The previous version of the license did read:
"Do whatever you wish with this piece of software.
I don't care about licensing/copyright.
Everyone has all the rights to do anything with this software, no restrictions whatsoever." [3]
[1] https://trisquel.info/en/wiki/trisquel-community-guidelines
[2] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#FLOSS
[3] https://github.com/teddit-net/teddit/commit/314bd40b35f2e36fea0ade22b2f42cf202751067
"Do whatever you wish with this piece of software.
I don't care about licensing/copyright.
Everyone has all the rights to do anything with this software, no restrictions whatsoever."
That's how software should be, Imaginary Property is a spook. At that point software culture is more important. If we didn't have copyright, people made a business model on secret software, that would only work until the software gets cracked and people will just use the cracked version until the source code gets leaked or reverse engineered.
I agree. I too do not dislike the original wording of the license.
We do have copyright, though, so it is important to make sure that whatever code is intended to be libre, stays libre.
I feel by believing copyleft isn't a spook, you're giving the system of copyright legitimacy. To me it's like using the legal system of Slavery to end Slavery. Freeing slaves by buying them and going to the Courthouse and filling out the paperwork that says the people you bought is no longer property and they made enough money as free people so they can buy their family members. I'm sure people did that, but the most effective way was breaking the law. You may think a war ended slavery, but that war caused more slavery. The first Republican President started the draft, a form of slavery that didn't end until the 1970's and even then, men still have to sign up for the draft to this day and people protested by breaking the law.
Successful permissively-licensed software ends up in proprietary software. It lowers the development cost to subjugate users. Copyleft avoids that.
I don't believe in licenses, they're a spook. It's like when licenses were invented, they took rights away from you and sold them back to you.
So you want to go back to the pre-gpl days when programmers who wanted to create free software were hauled into court for years at a time while various corporate entities made claims against their code? Sounds like fun.
I want to go back to the days before code was copyrightable and before a corporation was declared to be a person. Though the latter was a bi-product of the civil war, the logic was "well, black people are people, a group of people should be a person". I hate how that legal doctrine gets it's own special snowflake mental gymnastics and not being held to the same standards.
Like how do you put Monsanto in jail? or Why is eminent domain invoked with physical property but not with so called "intellectual" "property"? Why hasn't big daddy government invoked eminent domain on Windows and the x86 architecture making them both public domain? The system is a spook and the more people rebel against the system, thew less people would take it seriously.
Yes, well, your fantasy pre-civil war scenario isn't going to happen, so programmers still need some means of protecting themselves from the blood sucking leeches.
What I like about these front-ends is you're burdening them while not giving them your data.
It's like when a console company sells a console for $400, but it costs them $600 to make and they hope they'll make their money back by selling games that they tax and unlocking the internet play, but you modify it so you can run homebrew on it. In that case, the console company just lost $200 on your $400 purchase.
But in the case of Youtube, say you could upload videos via the CLI (and you probably can) and there's a 2GB upload limit for non-partners, so if you upload 10 videos per day, not counting redundancy, you make Youtube waste $0.57 per day on disc space, and that's $208.05 per year not counting redundancy and lower disc space of low resolution proxies. Say if you upload a low level optimized 8k video, youtube's encoding would be less well optimized. You could just upload minimally tweaked public domain content.
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires