Last time I tried this...it was alot easier to just buy the concentrate from Cube-Cola rather than trying to source all of the essential oils separately and shear them together.
I think you'd end up paying less, too. I paid about 20 bucks for the concentrate bottle plus shipping, made 1.75L of it, thought it was fine but couldn't quite replace Coke in my diet, and didn't buy again. Had I done it all from scratch, I'm pretty sure I would've paid more and had a bunch of essential oil bottles leftover, going to waste.
To be clear, it made about 1.75L of syrup, not cola. I kept the cola syrup jug in a fridge for like a year, and when I wanted a glass of "cola" I'd add about an oz of the syrup concentrate to a glass of carbonated water (which I pre-carbonated with my DrinkMate), and stirred to combine.
I used like half the amount of sugar the cube-cola recipe recommended, because it seemed high. It wasn't Coke sweet but it was still plenty sweet for a soft drink, to my palette.
EDIT: Originally said 1.75 ml, meant to say Liters.
Not hard? I mean you need a dedicated bottle brush, but the bottle itself is the only thing I recall having to clean. The DrinkMate advertises itself as being able to carbonate other things (juice, flat soda, etc.), but I never carbonate anything other than water in the bottle, then add my syrups only after decanting. It prevents the bottle from getting sticky.
Yes...but let's also be realistic. Very few people are still using this Kindle as their daily driver. They've already upgraded to a PaperWhite or something better.
But there's a very simple reason that Amazon is cutting support for these. Many people (myself included--I have a 4th Gen still kicking around) keep one around because, after Amazon removed the Download option for Ebooks awhile back, having one of these old Kindles is the only way to download ebooks in a format from Amazon that can have their DRM cracked.
All Kindles newer than a certain date use the KFX format, with an encryption scheme that is constantly changing (basically any time someone figures out how to break it, Amazon updates it). Killing support for these old devices is basically Amazon's last step in removing "legacy" encryption schemes that can still be broken.
It would be the equivalent of Nintendo delivering a new firmware update for their Wii and Wii-U systems, in order to patch out a recently-discovered exploit. It serves no other purpose than to demonstrate the extreme contempt for Amazon's end-users and the lengths they're willing to go to combat user-freedom^W "piracy".
Good news: this cat and mouse game is keeping some of our brothers / sisters in software employed at FAANG. I feel like the girl from the kombucha reaction gif weighing both sides in this back and forth rally lol
I disagree. There's no technical reason why they can't still work. They're perfectly good devices (possibly some needing a battery replacement). Why do we think it's ok to turn working devices into e-waste, because the company behind them needs to make a "business decision".
(Which in this case is likely DRM-related, which drops my sympathy meter below zero.)
14-19 years might be a respectable lifetime for a handheld electronic device, but in most cases (good care assumed) it is not a respectable lifetime for a book.
> 1. OnlyOffice is claiming that the license was violated
The part of the license violated was the removal of OnlyOffice's trademark and branding. Yet their license does not provide a right to use their trademark and branding. Those rights are still fully reserved by OnlyOffice.
This allows OnlyOffice to use legal means to shut down any fork or changes they are not comfortable with.
I think you're claiming wrong stuff here. AGPLv3 section 7 paragraph b) expressively authorize the author to require an attribution in the derived work or copy. What Nextcloud did was to remove this attribution, so they actually mooted their own right to use the code under that license. There's nothing related to trademark or branding violation here. If OnlyOffice attacked Nextcloud for using their TM or brand for respecting the license, they would be debunked at a trial (if it even reach a trial), since they expressively allowed the use of the attribution in distributing their work with this license. Note: This license doesn't give you the right to use the branding of OnlyOffice on a derived product and claim it's yours or you're acting as them, that's a complete different usage case here.
> you must retain the original Product logo when distributing the program
I understand "retain" in the way that you have to display the logo anywhere where the original OnlyOffice displays it. So I think you actually have to "use the branding of OnlyOffice".
----
> What Nextcloud did was to remove this attribution
Did they? If including the logo anywhere counts as attribution, I don't think they did. The logo is still present in several places:
AGPL allows for compatibility with a requirement for attribution but it doesn’t not allow (and explicitly says people can ignore) any further requirements beyond that.
A copyright attribution is e.g: “Copyright 2026 kube-system”. Attribution does not mean the same thing as “logo” or “branding”
The OnlyOffice license is ultimately a terrible crayon license. Those two requirements they wrote in are self contradictory… in consecutive sentences even. I kind of doubt that any court is gonna take that super seriously. It seems to be intentionally misleading or malicious, which is frowned upon.
> Pursuant to Section 7(b) of the License you must retain the original Product logo when distributing the program. Pursuant to Section 7(e) we decline to grant you any rights under trademark law for use of our trademarks.
> Pursuant to Section 7 § 3(b) of the GNU AGPL you must retain the original ONLYOFFICE logo in the upper left corner of the user interface when distributing the software.
IANAL, but from the wording above it appears that OnlyOffice has modified it in a way that makes it impossible to fork as a new project.
They’re mistakenly conflating “attribution” with “branding” or “trademark”. They’re different things. In the context of a copyright license, attribution is something like “// Copyright 2012 <whoever> Corporation” that you might see in a source file.
This use doesn’t violate trademark because you aren’t pretending to be them, you are attributing them as the source. Just like I can say “the Big Mac is a sandwich at McDonalds” and my comment is completely legal.
Even if “attribution” didn’t already mean something different — this reading of the AGPL is laughably stupid — first of all, you can’t compel someone to break the law in a contract anyway... and second, that’s an illogical interpretation of that section. Why would it be intentionally self contradictory? Clearly that isn’t right.
Requiring specific branding is not provided for in 7 § 3(b) and it is specifically forbidden by the the sentences that immediately follow:
> All other non-permissive additional terms are considered "further restrictions" within the meaning of section 10. If the Program as you received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is governed by this License along with a term that is a further restriction, you may remove that term.
What they should do is make sure they keep all attribution in source files and tell them to pound sand about their bogus branding claims.
You're right, the branding claim here is BS but attribution requirements are legit. I only took a cursory glance at their repo, but I don't see any copyright notices for OnlyOffice in EuroOffice. There should be.
I said "OnlyOffice is claiming" intentionally -- if it's BS then it's BS. I don't see anything in AGPLv3 that allows them to require branding, only attribution.
Still, you can (and often will) terminate a business partnership over BS arguments.
Question being did OnlyOffice terminate the business relationship in a legal way. Just because you dislike a companies trajectory doesn't necessarily immediately allow you to terminate business relations.
> 2. Even if you fork a project in complete compliance with a software license, a software license doesn't grant you an ongoing business partnership
That's fair, I'd just argue it's akin to to Red Hat's current model of "All of our code is free and open source...but if any of our business subscribers share it, we will terminate their license."
It's not even that -- OnlyOffice hasn't terminated anyone's license. It's more like: Linus allows me to fork Linux but he's not going to join a Zoom call with one my customers.
It might be because he is not using nintendo's sdk anymore, particularly the "microcode" for RSP "coprocessor". Most N64 emulators usually do not emulate RSP properly, but detect which specific nintendo's microcode is used and then emulate it's behavior.
Does anyone know what it means for something to be a "multi-core emulator" like Ares is? Like, is there some underlying benefit to developing emulators for multiple systems under the same name? Is there some shared code or what?
Correct, both of them are really really old, accuracy wise. N64 emulation has improved a lot in the past 4-5 years, but old emulators haven’t caught up
Traditionally, emulators relied heavily on HLE. Low-level efforts are recent and not mature.
The miSTer core for N64 (and ModRetro's M64 core effort by the same person) and Ares N64 support are the only two serious efforts I am aware of. They tend to share compatibility issues, and advance together when understanding of the platform grows.
Obviously this is just a personal judgment, but I believe N64 is currently understood at quite a good level. Most of the docs are on https://n64brew.dev/. Low level efforts are recent for sure, though I'm not sure I would rate them as "not mature". Ares is able to run most of the library (including 64DD) and all the homebrew library with zero per-game configurations or tweaks.
The standards I applied are not some subjective "good level" but bsnes-level. The way Near intended.
The one game I am aware of and keep checking is "Wonder Project J2 - Koruro no Mori no Jozet".
Broken in both Ares and the miSTer core. AIUI nobody knows why it does not work yet, which shows gaps in the understanding of the machine. Otherwise not an issue for me, as I can run it on the actual hardware, which I own.
Note that, in no small way, I do appreciate the efforts. The state of the art of N64 emulation is much better now than just a few years ago. But it sure is not there yet.
I believe there's no way, on today's PC hardware, to emulate a 5th-gen console as accurate as a 4th-gen one. 4th-gen consoles can be emulated with cycle accuracy, 5th-gen cannot.
N64 also happens to be by far the heavier console to emulate in 5th-gen group. The unified memory architecture poses unique challenges for cycle accuracy, given that conflicting accesses by different peripherals are serialized in various ways, causing stalls, and also non deterministic behaviors as the signals cross different clock domains.
So the issue is in part that this level of detail hasn't been fully reverse engineered yet, but that's because there is no rush since the information wouldn't be usable anyway right now in an emulator.
5th gen definitely constitutes a huge jump in complexity. N64 is indeed not easy.
I am hopeful as ModRetro's m64 launches, with a FPGA larger than the one in the miSTer, and there's an associated influx of developers looking at the platform, we'll see renewed energy directed towards understanding the N64.
Don't use retroarch, his project lead is a terrible person who leeches off from donations without repassing to the core contributors that does the actual work.
How exactly is this going to stop scammers from simply modifying their scam runbook to say "Turn this thing on, and get back to me in 24 hours.", and then continue on from the next step?
We know from Nigerian email scams that these things can stretch out days, weeks, months, all to get the victim to do the thing.
> We know from Nigerian email scams that these things can stretch out days, weeks, months, all to get the victim to do the thing.
the real issue i think is using technology to stop a non-technology problem (scams) as that is a society problem
but it seems govts arent interested or incapable of solving the causes (education, opportunity, destitution, etc etc) and probably also influx of scams from sanctioned countries (again a society/world level problem) that cant participate in the world trade etc...
so they lean on the technology companies to lockdown things more because what else can they do?
The Nigerian type scams typically prey on greed; time pressure isn't part of the draw.
There's another class of scams where the draw is fear - "your son is in jail", "your bank account is under investigation and will be closed in 24 hours if you don't act now", &c. They rely on time pressure to prevent the victim from reaching out directly to the parties they're lying about and disproving the scam.
This is aimed at that particular type of scam and that particular type of victim.
People give me weird looks when I grab a recycled box as soon as I walk in and proceed to carry it around the store. But I consistently only need about four items (or rather, there's a ton of other stuff I sometimes get there, but there are only four items that I need urgently--coffee bring one of them).
I could use a cart, but having a cart makes navigating around the warehouse 10x slower. If I'm just carrying stuff under my arm or in box, I can walk quickly, I can walk around people, and I can get the the self-checkout aisle and GTFO of the store without taking an hour...
https://cube-cola.org/
I think you'd end up paying less, too. I paid about 20 bucks for the concentrate bottle plus shipping, made 1.75L of it, thought it was fine but couldn't quite replace Coke in my diet, and didn't buy again. Had I done it all from scratch, I'm pretty sure I would've paid more and had a bunch of essential oil bottles leftover, going to waste.
reply