Another thing that happens to outdoor grown cannabis is pesticide contamination. Even if your farm is a good distance from some commercial agriculture, if they spray it can, and does, contaminate your crop -- which for regulated cannabis requires destruction. Literally burning (or composting) thousands of dollars of product.
And if the pesticides test are hot on the cross-contaminated cannabis; how much is on those apples three fields over?
Typically, and USA specific, the rules are to grind it up, mix with equal parts existing dirt/compost and then it's OK. So that dilutes it by half; then this compost is spread around and, like you said, can be used for other crops. Also, as the material sits in the compost pile, which should be agitated, the pesticides will leach out/break down.
Many asterisks here but there are methods for remediating herbicide and pesticide contamination. Not saying it’s universally solved, but its not universally unsolvable either.
Edit: I meant to speak specifically in terms of compost production.
> which for regulated cannabis requires destruction
Which regulation is this that requires destroying a nearby crop... instead of the one the pesticide was actually applied to? I'm confused here. Pesticides don't "contaminate" crops in that way, they're literally intended to be use on the food.
I live in NZ where there are medical standards applied to legal cannabis - only recently have I seen dispensaries advertising non irradiated cannabis, presumably because the manufacturing facilities have progressed to no longer require it.
Some of it has to do with combustion breakdown products. Some Canadian producers got nailed with using (directly or indirectly) antifungals with that issue:
Big nope - pesticides are there to repel or kill bugs. A lot of times the recommendation is to wash fruit before eating it to remove pesticides or lead from fuel burned by cars in the vicinity, etc.
Really? I'll mention that to the birds in my neighbourhood.
The seeds and oil are quite nutritious, and the leaves sometimes have a tinge of turpentine that fits well in a vinaigrette salad. It's also common to make cannabis butter for culinary as well as cosmetic uses.
The eaten one goes through your stomach acid and can be flushed out naturally through the system. The inhaled particles may get stuck in your lungs or worse: absorbed. Lungs are not a through channel. Things absorbed there go to the brain, blood stream, a lot faster. The stuff you spray on plants is usually meant to kill or repel bugs and critters. So won’t be friendly to lung or brain tissue. Possible cancerous too.
These pesticides are a bit like the magical Chernobyl radioactive cloud, which, thanks to some miraculous high pressure and low pressures zones, neatly avoided some countries by flowing along their borders.
Here, the pesticides are magically contained by our stomach acids, and never pass the gut barrier to enter our bodies, making them absolutely safe.
Another thing that kinds of sucks about this whole "license rug-pull" kind of business is that other teams (like ours) who are publishing open-source software/tools are now suspects too.
Folk ask themselves, why contribute to this thing (MIT/GPL licenses) if there some for-profit entity involved?
Folk can't take us at face-value (I'd argue demonstrated value) and level (unfounded) accusations at us; because some other player did things "dirty".
Well, other folk wanted to pay for support/customisation and in USA you make a for-profit entity to do that.
So the corporate part of the open-source project is, nearly, a requirement.
"Folk ask themselves, why contribute to this thing (MIT/GPL licenses) if there some for-profit entity involved?"
You put MIT or GPL in the same bucket here, but really shouldn't because the difference is all that matters.
There is no "rug-pull" as you call it. What happened with Redis is what the BSD license allows and what people should expect to happen.
The combination of GPL (or AGPL) with a large enough and diverse set of contributors who keep their rights in their contributions is a proven way to prevent what happened with Redis.
It is our decision as publishers of open-source projects which way we want to go. It is our decision as contributors which open-source projects we support.
Both ways are fine, but blaming others that you regret your decision is not.
> The combination of GPL (or AGPL) with a large enough and diverse set of contributors who keep their rights in their contributions is a proven way to prevent what happened with Redis.
Also the lack of a CLA (and/or copyright assignment) because many "modern" projects under the GPL ask you to waive your rights away, thus nullifying the license. Do not contribute to them if you have any self-respect.
I have self-respect and have no problem contributing to projects with a CLA and copyright assignment. I recognize that I don't control what happens with my contributions, as I have consciously agreed to their terms. Controlling what happens in the future of a project simply has never had anything to do with my motivations for contributing to a project.
AWS never offered a service based on the AGPLv3 version of the MongoDB server. Therefore the change of license terms to SSPLv1 was not directly caused by Amazon’s use of the software as part of an offered service, and had no impact to Amazon DocumentDB as an independently developed interoperable protocol implementation.
There were cloud providers headquartered in Asia that did offer AGPLv3 based MongoDB server as a service.
Yes it does. You can make a private, proprietary app that’s just tweaking a few bits of a BSD project. You can’t do that with the GPL.
Following that, unless the project has a CLA (so that the owner of the project reserves all rights of the code that’s contributed and essentially owns the contribution), any contributions made under the GPL cannot be made closed source, can’t be switched to an incompatible license, etc, because the contribution itself is GPL’d.
Of course, I said proprietary. You said commercial.
Proprietary refers to ownership and licensing. While I somewhat conflated it with closed-source in my comment, it nevertheless applies since we are talking about the ability to make it closed source.
You can relicense derivative works of MIT or BSD software provided that you satisfy the original license requirements (attribution). This is irrelevant of commercializing it.
Conversely, and to your point, you can sell GPL software you didn’t write, or sell a derivative work of it, but because of the copyleft nature, your derivative work must also be licensed under a compatible GPL license.
It is not even the for-profit thing, it is the VC, because they will be expect to make millions and millions off the project and that is not really possible with just support contracts and similar
You don't need to ask people to rely on your promises. Just make sure that you are not able to do a rug pull, and explain that. It's generally pretty easy (just don't require a CLA) but you can make it clearer. For example, clarify that you don't own everyone's copyright by writing a copyright notice which includes all of the project's contributors.
What would you feel if you did all the work, but other companies made all the money by redistributing your software? Wouldn't you find that unmaintainable in the long run?
If you're looking for something similar still you may want to checkout https://aframe.io/ -- it's JS library(s) and you load them, then use custom tags in HTML to create VR worlds. it's rad.
With UUIDv7/v8 (and ULID) there are some timestamps in the front half. I've seen spots where the query was in the style of `uuid_col >= 'SOME_UUID_0000' AND ulid_col <= 'SOME_UUID_FFFF'` When one is using them ast the timing for record create/insert these things happen.
I love ULID too; but it's really just UUIDv7 (or v8) with a mustache (it's all just 128bit IDs). And in the PG world, where there isn't native support for ULID one can use UUIDv7/8 and bridge that gap. We use ULID extensively in exposed IDs, it's very URL friendly, copy/paste friendly, etc -- but it's a UUID datatype in the DB. (ie: ULID => UUID => DB)
I thought the Apple platform had the best consumer experience and that's why folk love it -- it "just works" -- cause they keep the riff-raff out of their gated community.
Perhaps they let this one slip through because their team was too busy dragging out the review process for our cannabis compliance application, they can only afford so many reviewers after all. We wouldn't want children accidentally getting their hands on regulatory compliance data for deadly deadly cannabis. (which could happen with our application, after they had signed up and verified their agency cannabis license (which only takes many months/years and $$$$$s to get))
Apples app store is way worse than the google play store. i was shocked at how bad the app store is with shitty ads and promoted content over organic search results
And yet, the top result for "Bitcoin wallet" on the play store isn't a scam. And on it's definitely not a scam on F-Droid where I would personally look for a Bitcoin wallet.
It did - before cheapo enshittification started creeping in. I believe some time ago I saw some research on the quality of App Store app review process … zero protection.
But, even at this stage, Apple is still “the best”, because of the slower pace of the corruption and in comparison to the toxic dumpster fire of the alternatives.
Android and Windows are spyware/malware masquerading as OSs.
Or, we can say that all of them are dumpster fires, even if Apple is maybe the best of the shitty app stores.
On Apple though, you don't have anything other the App store. That's something to consider. On Android, you have the chance to install F-Droid for example.
Really frustrating as folks can advertise that crap but, regulated cannabis is blocked. Heck, we can't even mention our product/protocols on these $BigCo sites or they'll kick us off forever! Trying to publish in the AppStore along side all that scam-ware -- nope, sorry can't have that deadly cannabis around here.
And if the pesticides test are hot on the cross-contaminated cannabis; how much is on those apples three fields over?
reply