The only way to meaningfully advocate for it after your company already announced their conditions and offerings is to present value gain.
What do you suggest concretely? What should be offered under what conditions? What would that mean as cost? What would the benefit be? How substantial is it?
Reaching out privately to them is certainly going beyond what you are employed for. I don't know about ill-advised - if you never disclose it or are at least mindful of that. But it's a personal assessment. You seem to be willing to invest a lot into a single customer, who tries to do something not offered or considered by the company. Whether it's personal interest, or first a broader better understanding of the use case, I can see how it could be worth or worthwhile. But I wouldn't get my hopes up about changing the opinions of your company [from their information alone].
Your company offered API access. So there is an interface available. They won't make it free unless they see and deem it worth it to do so.
Does it apply if you don't say that you are posting under the license? It may be implied, the intent is reasonably clear, but an argument of ambiguity can be made. You're merely linking to a license.
Does it apply if the link label mismatches the license? CC by-nc-sa does more than deny commercial AI training. It requires attribution, requires general non-commercial use, and requires share-alike.
Personally, I prefer when it's at least differently formatted to indicate it as a footer and not comment content. I've seen them smaller and IIRC italic on other commenters, which seems more appropriate and less distracting and noisy [for human consumption]. When the comment is no longer than the license footer… well…
How do you think the US tried to make China invade?
I think it's a bafflingly absurd claim. And I'm surprised some people wouldn't doubt it.
How does this fit into China invading and harassing other ships in international waters near Taiwan? Or China punishing Taiwans independent election results by doing military maneuvers around Taiwan, clearly showing force and threatening. And the constant reiterations of considering Taiwan as part of China. Integration of Taiwan is a clear and repeatedly voiced goal. Their willingness to use force was shown repeatedly; in Tibet, Hong Kong, and against minorities in their own established lands.
I don't see how with such a discrepancy believing the Chinese claims makes any sense. It's smoke and trying to influence and irritate the western nations and their alliances. Similar playbook to Russia.
I think it's not closed off enough, given that I regularly see accounts from other instances post comments that go against the goals and spirit set by Beehaw.
At the same time, I think we don't have enough of a new content stream. I don't think opening up is a good solution though. That would mean losing what sets Beehaw apart.
approachable and friendly for people curious about free and open source operating systems and Linux distributions
which is definitely not the content there. Looks like the original website went defunct in 2022 between January and May. Their website repo is archived.
Right now it's entirely timestamp-based. That means it can interface and work on simple playback terms. On time, jump, jump to time, etc. Having to get frame data and hash it, and make playback depend on it adds a lot of technical complexity.
If ad length varies you don't even know how far to jump ahead. And if you haven't prebuffered the data until after the ad, you can't find out from a hashed after-frame-hash-value either.
