vfvthunter

Oregon here. If you mean better in the sense that they dont convict guilty people much less innocent people, then yes much better run.

He copied the code from BambuStudio into an Orca fork to make it connect to Bambu's cloud. That is A) deliberate and B) easily meets the definition of spoofing.

It is embarrassing that copying that one little thing made a third party fork able to connect to their cloud because A) that would be embarrassing for smaller IoT devices and we're talking about thousand-dollar printers and B) it's highly regarded to be saying on the one hand that your cloud needs security while on the other hand a simple copy/paste of a single function bypassed the security of said cloud that needs protecting.

I agree he would win in court. I don't think they ever planned to even file a complaint. I disagree that it is against the spirit of the AGPL. Signal does the same thing (here's our source code but only our official app can officially connect to our servers and we can ban your app at any time) as far as I can tell and no one complains about them and their shit is AGPL 3.0 only.

As I already said, I don't think they would have any beef with him if he removed that single function - the one that enables use of their cloud infrastructure. The exact problem they have with him, is his distribution of that. I agree that he can distribute it, and they would lose any lawsuit about that. I also agree that its on them to fix it. But returning to the original point, by making source code that can be so easily copied available for download, they have not violated the AGPL. They are not saying he can't distribute his own Orca fork or even his own BambuStudio fork. They're saying "Stop making it connect to our servers" which again I agree is actually their problem. The C&D is just a lazy stopgap.

He is free to remove the part where it spoofs itself as BambuStudio and do whatever the hell he wants with it. He can probably distribute it with the spoof and continue without actually getting sued because they are likely fixing this as I type this. If they do sue him it will be for unauthorized use of their cloud services. I do think they'd have to sue individual users.

Accessing my garage and using my tools == using Bambu's cloud infrastructure, which they clearly do not want him (or apparently any non-BambuStudio clients) doing any more.

Pawel still has access to the Bambu-modified software, which is what the AGPL covers. There is no violation there.

Bambu's issue is with him taking a fork of Orca and spoofing some data (from THEIR FREELY AVAILABLE SOURCE CODE) to appear as Bambustudio to their servers.

A contract that says you can park in my driveway doesn't give you permission to access my garage and use all my tools.

Absolutely a dick move but not really not abuse of a contract.

What features did they take away?

The fact that Pawel was able to copy their source code and paste it into an Orca fork is direct proof from Pawel himself that they are honoring the AGPL.

The C&D presumably wanted him to remove the ID/version string or at least stop distributing it, i.e., they only want real BambuStudio on their cloud and that was the laziest way to achieve that

AGPL does not have a "don't be an asshole" clause

That they are. However, that's abusing the developer, not the AGPL.

I didn't say they respected anyone's rights.

They sent a C&D asking him to take the code down. He was and still is free to ignore that C&D. It's simply the easiest, laziest move on their part to get non-BambuStudio software off their cloud. I am sure they are working on software updates right now; their shitty, dickish C&D was simply the most expedient way to stop it.

I seriously doubt they would've taken him to court over it, and also doubt they'll sue this clout- and click-chasing Rossmann idiot either. But a C&D requires almost no effort.

Sending that lazy childish C&D still in no way violates the AGPL.

Please explain how they are abusing the AGPL

So the C&D was stupid, and so is how their network works apparently.

Fundamentally, what Bambu are saying is that they have a right to restrict what software accesses their network. The C&D was allegedly sent to stop distribution of software that was written to access their network in an unauthorized fashion (Allegedly according to their ToS).

AGPL covers source code. It does not cover who can access what network with AGPL'ed software.

Thus Bambu - like it or not - have a right to limit what software accesses their cloud. You are still free to do whatever you want with Bambu's AGPL'ed software. But they don't have to let you on their network if they don't want to.

With that out of the way, sending a C&D is a pretty regarded way to accomplish this. The correct way would be to sniff out which clients are using 'real' Bambu Studio and which aren't. However according to Bambu, Pawel specifically modified BambuStudio (ya know, because they haven't violated the AGPL, because he is free to do that) to make it look like Studio.

I can only assume that actually locking down their network for real would require every Bambu printer to have a firmware update that would add some sort of signed encryption to access the cloud features. The C&D appears to be a shitty action prior to a huge undertaking.

I do wonder exactly how secure their super spendy "Enterprise" X1E printer could possibly be given how easily Pawel was able to make a fork work on their cloud.

As to your second paragraph about functionality and theft, 1) I can still print from Bambu's cloud with my Bambu printer so I don't think they've changed any functionality, and I can still use Orca in LAN mode. and 2) designed obsolescence exists.

I disagree with your assertion that because forks were able to access cloud functionality previously, that Bambu must maintain that functionality ad infinitum. My opinion would change if anyone showed me where previously they were promoting how any third party apps could access their cloud.

I do not see it this way. Google is a publicly traded company responsible for creating value for their shareholders. When they became dicks about ad blockers on youtube last year or so, was it because they hit a bandwidth Moore's law? No. It was a money grab.

ChatGPT is simply what Google should've been 5-7 years ago, but Google was more interested in presenting me with ads to click on instead of helping me find what I was looking for. ChatGPT is at least 50% of my searches now. And they're losing revenue because of that.

Have a link that explains how Ozempic is fiber-mimetic or pro-biotic-mimetic? If that were the case I would expect to see fiber and probiotics to be associated with gastroparesis. They aren't.

Ozempic exists because Americans are addicted to hypercaloric hyper delicious "food" that was engineered by the big tobacco companies that used their excess cash to buy food companies in the 80's. They then applied their research on making tobacco addictive to make food addictive.

Modern American food is literally the new tobacco.

Ozempic disrupts hunger signals. Fiber does that to a certain extent ("increases feelings of satiety"). I haven't seen anything about probiotics doing that, but I think probiotics are bunk and tend not to read about them.

The effect here seems to have little to do with gut microbiota: acetic acid itself induces the liver to stop making fats (lipogenesis) and start liberating fats into the blood (lipolysis). AcOH also by itself seems to decrease insulin resistance/increase insulin sensitivity, as well as downregulate gluconeogenesis. Several of the other studies in the bibliography confirmed this, and a couple even did tissue biopsies pre during and post to assess for changes in genetic expression of things like AMPK.

They're misquoting Park et al. The PV study reduced visceral fat. If you take anything (including coffee) that results in lipolysis, and then don't burn the newly freed fats off with activity, it just goes (re-deposits) somewhere else. Specific to the PV paper, it resulted in a redistribution of the fat from VAT to SAT.

TL;DR: Pomegranate vinegar shifts fat from omentum to subcutaneous tissue. It does not increase muscle mass.