They have open sourced their client software and libraries, but the core of what they provide is closed source software that runs on their servers.

It doesn’t really matter though. It will take away jobs from people in creative industries that only creative people were able to do before. The end result is basically the same.

That’s because Mastodon doesn’t have direct messages. It is not a chat platform. You can bend the privacy settings to publish posts similarly to DMs, but no one should use it as such.

The issue is that Firefox is, as far as I know, much much more difficult to simply use as just the “rendering engine” for some other customized browser.

There’s the arcfox experiment thing that tries to make firefox look and feel the same as arc, but if arc isn’t mature, then this thing is just simply unusable to almost everyone. It’s still probably easier to do than to make a completely new browser using firefox as a base though.

Copyright doesn’t apply just to stuff copied verbatim though, it applies to a lot more. It really doesn’t matter if it is or isn’t stored verbatim. Translations and derivative works are not exact copies and still fall under copyright. Copyright even applies to broad things such as “a concept of a character” and this can result in some pretty strange arguments some copyright holders might use, such as “Sherlock Holmes that doesn’t smile is public domain, but Sherlock Holmes who shows emotion is copyright infringement” as described here.

It doesn’t matter if an exact copy of the book was made. It matters if the core information that book carried was taken as a whole and used elsewhere. And even though the data was transformed as statistical information, the information is still there in that model. The model itself is basically just an “unauthorized translation” of hundreds of thousands of works into a very esoteric format.

The whole argument of “inspiration” is also misleading. Inspiration is purely a human trait. We’re not talking about humans being inspired. We’re talking about humans using copyrighted material to create a model, and about computers using that model to create content. Unless you’d argue that humans should be considered the same thing as machines in the eyes of the law, this argument simply doesn’t work.

Funny thing is that Threads is the new player who is currently dominating the microblogging market while Twitter is just watching. Technically speaking, Twitter is the one being “cucked” here.

Open https://wefwef.app in your mobile browser, open the share slid out menu or however that menu is called and click on “add to home screen”. That’s it.