sincerely

I think “made” is probably fine, but it does bug me to see “I built/coded…” to describe a vibecoded project

They clearly have at least a decent bit in the tank bc whenever either lab releases a new update, the other one matches benchmarks in like 24h

> or against their TOS e.g. not a fanwork

Isn’t there an “original work” category?

Egregious & consistent mistreatment of the horses.

The past four mayors have all tried to end the practice but the jockeys (drivers?) are part of a powerful transportation union.

Isn’t archive.today notorious for doing exactly what you describe

"Oh darn, you know that thing I made and released with explicit, precise language defining who can use it and what, if any, restrictions apply? Well now someone is using it in complete accordance with those conditions I set out, and that's somehow making me upset"

The “hacker” community (for lack of a better term) has a longstanding and well documented skepticism towards the concept of intellectual property in general. “Information wants to be free” and all that.

Let he who has not downloaded from Annas Archive cast the first stone

Some people still make wood furniture by hand too. Do what makes you happy. Just don't get caught up insisting that you deserve to be paid for it.

I must be illiterate. Ofc. Sorry

edit: totally wrong

I’m not even sure what would be gained by formal verification of a GUI

Well there is no “roof rule” on the page they linked