Re: Minds.com

[Leland Best]

Hmmm,

On Thu, 2023-09-21 at 10:40 -0400, Michael McMahon wrote:
> Minds could be categorized as a "free speech zone" social network which 
> are typically popular with fascists so count me out.

Poor choice of words perhaps?  Freedom of speech is _supposed_ to be one of the
founding principles here in the US.  From
https://www.azquotes.com/author/5123-Benjamin_Franklin/tag/freedom-of-speech

   Without freedom of thought, there can be no such thing as wisdom; and no such
   thing as public liberty without freedom of speech; which is the right of 
every
   man as far as by it he does not hurt or control the right of another; and 
this
   is the only check it ought to suffer and the only bounds it ought to know
   Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the
   freedom of speech, a thing terrible to traitors.
   
   Benjamin Franklin 
   
But then, we're also _supposed_ to be educated enough to think
critically/skeptically about what we hear, see, and read.  From
https://www.azquotes.com/author/7392-Thomas_Jefferson/tag/education

   Errors of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.
   
   Thomas Jefferson
   
My only point/question being: That something is a "free speech zone" doesn't
seem like a very good reason, in and of itself, for disparaging it.  So, if this
is strictly your personal opinion, if you personally don't want to read what
they have to say, then I have no objection.  Obviously, you and everybody else
are free to think, say, read, write, etc. whatever you like.  But if you are
speaking on behalf of the FSF, which one might assume from your "signature",:

[...]
> Michael McMahon | Web Developer, Free Software Foundation
> GPG Key: 4337 2794 C8AD D5CA 8FCF  FA6C D037 59DA B600 E3C0
> https://fsf.org
[...]

then I'll have to think hard about my FSF membership.

[... no comment on the rest of the post, (copied below) ...]

Cheers
Leland
-- 
---
Leland C. Best  | Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is
lcbpub...@gmail.com | something you dreamt up after being drunk all night.
| -- Isaac Asimov
---


[...]
> 
> The licensing of the minds project is also questionable. It is built on 
> elgg which is GPL-2.0-only [1] so it should probably match. I'm not 
> following through with making issues though.
> 
> [1] https://github.com/Elgg/Elgg/issues/11610#issuecomment-358733982
> 
> Best,
> Michael McMahon | Web Developer, Free Software Foundation
> GPG Key: 4337 2794 C8AD D5CA 8FCF  FA6C D037 59DA B600 E3C0
> https://fsf.org
> 
> On 9/20/23 19:27, Valentino Giudice wrote:
> > Thank you a lot, Michael, this is quite interesting and something that I 
> > should investigate further.
> > Indeed the "friendly-challenge" package uses "friendly-pow", which is no 
> > good: https://github.com/FriendlyCaptcha/friendly-challenge/issues/159 
> > 
> > 
> > I still think that Minds can be of significant interest for the FSF and 
> > the free software community at large.
> > 
> >  > Never heard of minds
> > 
> > First, I should mention that I have absolutely no affiliation with them 
> > beyond merely having an account on their website.
> > 
> > Minds is a social media platform based in the United States which has 
> > rather liberal policies compared to mainstream platforms such as 
> > Facebook or X.
> > 
> > As I mentioned above, it's free software (although, now we know, 
> > encumbered by the FriendlyCaptcha proprietary component). It uses the 
> > AGPL license.
> > 
> > It attempts at decentralizing, but its attempts are IMHO mostly 
> > unsuccessful.
> > 
> > However, as a centralized platform, I think it aligns with the 
> > principles of the free software community (including freedom of speech 
> > and transparency, beyond just software freedom) more so than other 
> > platforms, including also X, which the FSF currently uses.
> > 
> > I still think that Minds has some significant shortcomings, which we can 
> > help it overcome.
> > This includes the CAPTCHA test, which can be replaced with a similar 
> > fully-free one, the fact that it doesn't currently comply with the text 
> > of the GDPR (which doesn't mean it's bad for privacy, but does mean it's 
> > a problem in the EU).
> > In some ways it's better than the Mastodon ecosystem because most 
> > Mastodon instances are small and unreliable and have rules that are 
> > restrictive beyond necessary.
> > 
> > Il giorno mer 20 set 2023 alle ore 22:34 Michael McMahon 
> > mailto:mich...@fsf.org>> ha scritto:
> > 
> >     Never heard of minds, but Friendly Captcha is deceivingly source
> >     available [1]. This is not apparent when you look at their main
> >     repository.
> > 
> >     [1] https://github.com/FriendlyCaptcha/friendly-pow/issues/13

Free software by getting rid of copyrights entirely. Just a thought.

[Leland Best]

Hi All,

A recent post by Dean Baker at The Center for Economics and Policy Research
(https://www.cepr.net/ ) has once again made me think that goals of the Free
Software movement in general, and the FSF specifically, might be better served
by fighting/lobbying/whatever for doing away with copyrights and patents
entirely (and replacing them with other mechanisms), rather than trying to work
within the existing system.

The post I'm referring to is:

https://www.cepr.net/quick-thoughts-on-ai-and-intellectual-property/

Admittedly, this post only directly addresses copyrights and "creative works"
but it _does_ tie in with the issue of "AI" systems plagiarizing people's work.
Since this has been discussed in various contexts on this list recently, I
thought I'd share the above post and see what thoughts people might have.

Just to be clear, within the existing system of copyrights, etc., The Copyleft
is absolutely brilliant (IMO).  But it seems to me that ever since the digital
revolution has made making copies of so many things virtually cost free (books,
music, movies/videos, software, and on and on), that the basic idea of the
copyright (and patents) is now something that is fundamentally flawed and needs
to go the way of the dinosaurs.  Just my $0.02.

Cheers
Leland
-- 
---
Leland C. Best  | Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is
lcbpub...@gmail.com | something you dreamt up after being drunk all night.
| -- Isaac Asimov
---


___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: LibrePlanet feedback [was Re: access to talks]

[Leland Best]

Hi Lori (and All),

On Fri, 2022-03-25 at 23:26 +, Lori Nagel via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
>  
> It is a shame you missed Sunday.  They fixed the technical issues and the 
> video
> feed got much much better.

Heh.  Just my luck.  Glad everybody else had a better experience on Sunday
though!

And thanks for the time and effort to put together your presentation about GNU
Jami.  I kept switching between yours and Gunnar's presentation about the
keyserver network.  I had/have an immediate interest in both and couldn't make
up my mind. :^/  Another reason I'm glad the recorded talks will be available!

>   It was great to see the turnaround on the second day of the conference. 
> Unfortunately my talk was Saturday.  Hopefully the replays from Saturday will
> not be bad like the streams were. 
[...]

Agreed.

Cheers
Leland
-- 
---
Leland C. Best  | Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is
lcbpub...@gmail.com |  something you dreamt up after being drunk all night.
| -- Isaac Asimov
PGP Fingerprint | 7B23ACB474299DF0E07F6DEBB8FEE465DCB9B6C3
---

[...]
>     On Friday, March 25, 2022, 11:37:38 AM EDT, Devin Ulibarri 
> 
> wrote:  
>  
>  Hi,
> 
> On 3/24/22 14:45, Leland Best wrote:
> > I couldn't find a place on the web-site for feedback about the 2022 
> > (virtual)
> > LibrePlanet conference so I'm posting it here. 
> 
> The LibrePlanet 2022 Questionnaire is published here:
> https://my.fsf.org/node/49
> 
> > My apologies if I'm out of line.
> > Obviously, all this is strictly my personal opinion.
> 
> There is nothing wrong with posting feedback to this mailing list. That
> being said, replies to the questionnaire help staff to more conveniently
> assess feedback in aggregate (e.g. to better see how many others may be
> saying similar things about x, y, and/or z). Please consider also adding
> your feedback to the questionnaire linked above.
> 
> As for the videos, the staff are busily working on preparing them for
> publication. We expect them to be published fairly soon.
> 
> Thank you,
> Devin
> 
>    It is a shame you missed Sunday.  They fixed the technical issues and
>    the video feed got much much better.  It was great to see the
>    turnaround on the second day of the conference.  Unfortunately my talk
>    was Saturday.  Hopefully the replays from Saturday will not be bad like
>    the streams were.
> 
>    On Friday, March 25, 2022, 11:37:38 AM EDT, Devin Ulibarri
>     wrote:
>    Hi,
>    On 3/24/22 14:45, Leland Best wrote:
>    > I couldn't find a place on the web-site for feedback about the 2022
>    (virtual)
>    > LibrePlanet conference so I'm posting it here.
>    The LibrePlanet 2022 Questionnaire is published here:
>    [1]https://my.fsf.org/node/49
>    > My apologies if I'm out of line.
>    > Obviously, all this is strictly my personal opinion.
>    There is nothing wrong with posting feedback to this mailing list. That
>    being said, replies to the questionnaire help staff to more
>    conveniently
>    assess feedback in aggregate (e.g. to better see how many others may be
>    saying similar things about x, y, and/or z). Please consider also
>    adding
>    your feedback to the questionnaire linked above.
>    As for the videos, the staff are busily working on preparing them for
>    publication. We expect them to be published fairly soon.
>    Thank you,
>    Devin
>    --
>    Devin Ulibarri // Outreach & Communications Coordinator
>    Free Software Foundation
>    Join the FSF and help us defend software freedom:
>    [2]https://my.fsf.org/
>    US government employee? Use CFC charity code 63210 to support us
>    through
>    the Combined Federal Campaign. [3]https://cfcgiving.opm.gov/
>    GPG Key: 2E0E CE75 F816 2B40 7D66 6767 8797 38E6 D644 0D57
>    What's GPG? See [4]https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/ for more info.
>    ___
>    libreplanet-discuss mailing list
>    [5]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
>    [6]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
> 
> References
> 
>    1. https://my.fsf.org/node/49
>    2. https://my.fsf.org/
>    3. https://cfcgiving.opm.gov/
>    4. https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/
>    5. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
>    6. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
> ___
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss




___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: LibrePlanet feedback [was Re: access to talks]

[Leland Best]

Hi Devin (and All),

On Fri, 2022-03-25 at 11:36 -0400, Devin Ulibarri wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 3/24/22 14:45, Leland Best wrote:
> > I couldn't find a place on the web-site for feedback about the 2022
> > (virtual)
> > LibrePlanet conference so I'm posting it here. 
> 
> The LibrePlanet 2022 Questionnaire is published here:
> https://my.fsf.org/node/49
> 
> > My apologies if I'm out of line.
> > Obviously, all this is strictly my personal opinion.
> 
> There is nothing wrong with posting feedback to this mailing list. That
> being said, replies to the questionnaire help staff to more conveniently
> assess feedback in aggregate (e.g. to better see how many others may be
> saying similar things about x, y, and/or z). Please consider also adding
> your feedback to the questionnaire linked above.

Ah!  Thanks for the tip/pointer/link.  Will do.

> 
> As for the videos, the staff are busily working on preparing them for
> publication. We expect them to be published fairly soon.

Great!  FWIW, no "rush" for me, just good to know they _will_ be posted (and
where).  Thanks again for everybody's time and effort!

> 
> Thank you,
> Devin
> 

Cheers
Leland
-- 
---
Leland C. Best  | Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is
lcbpub...@gmail.com |  something you dreamt up after being drunk all night.
| -- Isaac Asimov
PGP Fingerprint | 7B23ACB474299DF0E07F6DEBB8FEE465DCB9B6C3
---



___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

LibrePlanet feedback [was Re: access to talks]

[Leland Best]

All,

On Mon, 2022-03-21 at 12:18 -0400, Greg Farough wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21 2022, Jim Fulner  wrote:
> 
> > I'm having trouble finding links to the recordings of talks I wasn't
> > able to make.
> > 
> > 
> > Can someone help me find those, particualrly as due to religious
> > concerns I was uanble to do any on Sunday.
> 
> The recorded talks aren't published quite yet. We're working on it,
> though, and aim to have them up in the next week or so.
[...]

I couldn't find a place on the web-site for feedback about the 2022 (virtual)
LibrePlanet conference so I'm posting it here.  My apologies if I'm out of line.
Obviously, all this is strictly my personal opinion.

On the up-side: The topics for this year's LibrePlanet were great.  I frequently
wanted to watch more than one at once.  This is one reason I too am looking
forward to being able to stream the recorded talks.  I think at least one reason
they were of such interest to me is that "Living Liberation" 100% (reaching the
top of the Freedom Ladder) has eluded me for decades.  So, naturally, talks
about subjects related to getting there were/are of great interest to me.

On the down-side: I have a 1.2Gbps Internet connection (in CO, USA) which I've
measured via

https://www.speedtest.net/

at between 800Mbps and 900Mbps down, and 30Mbps to 40Mbps up.  Despite this, the
connection for LibrePlanet couldn't keep up with real-time video resulting in
frequent pauses for "buffering".  Manually pausing to force buffering more data
would help for a while, but inevitably playback would empty the buffer once
again resulting in frequent pauses.  This appeared to be equally prevalent for
hi-res and low-res streams/connections.  By mid-afternoon (EDT) I couldn't stand
it anymore and gave up with a headache.  I skipped Sunday entirely.

I saw some traffic about this issue on IRC but it mostly seemed aimed a people
with slow Internet connections.  Not the case here.  Anyway, I'm hoping
streaming the recorded talks will work better.  Another reason I was curious
about the answer to the original question in the "access to talks" thread.

Finally: Lest anyone think I'm now "down" on virtual LibrePlanet, I'm not!  For
now, virtual is the only way I can expect to attend.  I'm incredibly grateful to
_everybody_ involved in making this happen: FSF personnel, presenters, other
attendees, and everybody else who in any way contributed!  I'm already looking
forward to next year. :)

Cheers
Leland
-- 
---
Leland C. Best  | Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is
lcbpub...@gmail.com |  something you dreamt up after being drunk all night.
| -- Isaac Asimov
PGP Fingerprint | 7B23ACB474299DF0E07F6DEBB8FEE465DCB9B6C3
---



___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: We can't reject all nonfree hardware with today's technology.

[Leland Best]

Apologies for the late response.

Anyway, ...

On Sat, 2022-01-29 at 23:16 -0500, Richard Stallman wrote:
> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> 
>   >  We can't identify a physical 
>   > object with the designs of its parts. -- RMS
> 
>   > I disagree, majority if not all hardware has some form of indexing and 
>   > identification. For example this 3DSimo pcb has silkscreen that
> identifies:
> 
> Your response may be true, but it doesn't respond to the point I made.
> I can't plug in a design and run it.  I could only do that with a
> physical instance of the design.
> 
> In today's world, for people that are not hardware hackers, plans are
> not a practical substitute for a physical computer, a LED bulb, a
> clock, a chair, or any other useful physical object.
> 

One could reasonably (_I_ think) make an almost exactly analogous argument for
software:

   In today's world, for people that are not (software) hackers, source code is
   not a practical substitute for a working (binary) operating system, a working
   (binary) Wifi driver, a working (binary) copy utility, or any other (binary)
   program.

Just to be clear, _I'm_ not trying to argue that Free Software is not important,
or that the FSF should abandon it's efforts, or anything similar.  What I'm
trying to point out is that people tend to have a certain amount of tunnel
vision when thinking/discussing the Freedom issue.  They tend to only see it as
important and/or practical in areas in which they have some expertise.

99% of the people I know have never even _seen_ source code, never mind actually
compiled and installed the resulting binaries.  And modifying it?  Or fixing
bugs?  No blinking way!  That's what programmers do.  As a result, the idea of
Free Software seems a bit abstract and it's difficult for them to grasp the
benefits.

A programmer on the other hand is much more likely to "get" Free Software.  As a
personal note, in the 1990s I was writing the code for my PhD when I
"discovered" 'gcc'.  I spent several days getting it to build on the SGI
workstations I was using and never looked back.  Later I used 'gcc' to compile
TeX without which I couldn't have afforded software to write my dissertation. 
So for _me_ Free source code became essential and, in fact, _better_ than
binaries.  For a programmer, Free source code is something you can "plug in" and
run, fix, modify, etc..  But many programmers wouldn't know (or care) which end
of a soldering iron gets hot, or what to do with it when it did.  To them,
having the design for their computer is of no practical value.

Continuing my personal story, before I got into software I was an electrical
engineer.  So, when the SCSI chip in my Amiga A3000 died, having a motherboard
layout diagram (identifying all the components on the board) allowed me to
replace the dead chip.  In a related vein, having the detailed specs. for how
interrupts were handled both by the Motorola 68030 CPU and the rest of the Amiga
hardware allowed me to submit several patches to the Amiga Linux project (long
since defunct I think).  But even in cases where direct modification/repair of
hardware may not be practical by someone like me, other aspects of Freedom _do_
require free access to designs.  For example, if we say an LED bulb is an
acceptable hardware "black box" then how can anybody know whether it might not
contain a tiny camera broadcasting video from inside one's home?  And if it did,
with sufficient Free info, some bright eyed hardware type might be able to
figure out how to disable it in a way accessible to folks like me.  So, for
hardware types hardware designs, specs., etc. are just as important as source
code is to a programmer.

And so on.

Anyway, to reiterate/conclude, it seems to me that Freedom at _all_ levels is
ultimately important because somewhere there are people that will benefit from
that Freedom which, in the end, benefits everybody.  If the FSF chooses to
restrict it's focus to Freedom for what it defines as Software, that's fine.  I
get that staffing, funding, etc. limit what the FSF can do (and IMO they do a
great job within that domain).  But Freedom at _all_ levels is still important.
I guess the question is: To what, if any, extent does it make sense to try to
bring it all under one umbrella or, if not, along what lines should the efforts
be divided?

Cheers
Leland Best
-- 
---
Leland C. Best  | Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is
lcbpub...@gmail.com |  something you dreamt up after being drunk al

Re: Blind user complaining on Adobe web site

[Leland Best]

All,

I realize this thread has drifted somewhat from the original subject
line, but I just had to put my $0.02 (USD :) ) in on this comment.  So,
...

On Wed, 2021-04-28 at 22:20 -0400, Arthur Torrey wrote:
> (yeah! something other than flagellating RMS's deceased equine)
> 
> I sort of agree, but at the same time, it appears to me that the
> FLOSS software world is far less 'disability friendly' than the fruit
> company or the other big name OS

Seconded!  I have a disability that pretty much makes "Sticky Keys"
mandatory for me.  I'm therefore quite sensitive to support, or lack
thereof, for this (seemingly) simple feature.  This varies from one
Linux distribution to another and from one Desktop Environment (DE) to
another.  I can't remember how many times a new "stable" release of
Debian GNU/Linux has come out with some significant flaw in Sticky
Keys.  Some examples:

1. IIRC, in the "early" days, DEs had no support despite a plethora of
other settings available both through GUI tools, and by "tweaking"
config files.  Fortunately, one could just add '+accessx' to the X
command-line and get Sticky Keys in any X program.

2. Some DEs added GUI support for Sticky Keys but level/quality of
support varied widely.  Some offered little more than on/off support
while others had options to also turn Sticky Keys on/off via various
methods (e.g. press the  key five times in a row, press two
modifier keys simultaneously, etc.), whether or not to "lock" a
modifier when pressed twice, and whether or not to play a sound when a
modifier was pressed.

Personal note: The last feature (modifier beeps) has, IMO, been on a
long, slow downward spiral ever since it was first introduced.  When
first introduced it mimicked the version on Windoze.  It played one
sound when a modifier was first pressed (stuck), a second sound when it
was pressed again (locked), and a third sound when pressed a third time
(released).  These days most of the distributions I "play" with don't
actually play _any_ sound "out of the box" for one reason or another.

3. Most "modern" distributions have a fairly standard GUI interface for
turning Sticky Keys on/off ... but little else (including whether or
not to beep).  However, handling of beeps seems to have diverged "under
the hood" with some DEs (e.g. GNOME and MATE) using what I'll call a
third party library (libcairo?  lib) while others (e.g.
Xfce) rely on 'pulseaudio' to catch X11 "bell" events ... but for at
least a few years this has not worked without tinkering in undocumented
ways with how 'pulseaudio' gets started by the Display Manager and/or
DE.  Indeed, in Debian 'bullseye', Ubuntu since 19.xx, and Pop!_OS also
since 19.xx I have to write my own Bash script which I then add to each
De's "Startup Programs" list, and which tnhen invokes 'pactl' to get
this to work.  Come _on_ folks!  NOTE: Just to be clear, 'folks' here
refers to some unknown collection of developers, distribution
integrators, testers, etc. and _not_ specifically the FSF.

4. The Linux console.  For a long time it's been possible to get a
limited form of Sticky Keys in the Linux console using 'loadkeys' and
an appropriate "keymap".  It used to be easy to integrate this into the
boot sequence.  Just drop your customized keymap file in the right
place and it'd be one of the first things loaded during boot. But
_now_, this is apparently done through "console-setup", which in turn
uses "XKB", which in turn requires some obscure machinations to get it
included in the initramfs.  Ugh!  And I have yet to see a major Linux
distribution offer to set this up during installation.

5. ... and so on, and so on.

And this is just Sticky Keys we're talking about here.  Something
Windoze (and presumably Apple, etc.) have had since at least the late
1990s.  I can't imagine what others with more difficult/complex
requirements have to go through/suffer with.  I'm not surprised many
wind up going for proprietary solutions.

>   My S.O has just become legally blind due to medical issues, and
> while I've been looking at what might be available in the way of low-
> vision setups, I've been rather underwhelmed...
> 

My sympathies. :(  I'd be curious to know whether you ever find a
suitable Free, or even Open Source solution.

> 
> It seems every resource person she has heard from is pointing at the
> fruit company products as being most 'low vision friendly'.  As a
> paraplegic I have minimal (no) need for accessibility stuff on my
> computers, but when I look at what the quads I know who need more
> adaptive setups are also using fruit machines almost entirely.
> 
> I'm not a programmer of anything more complex than an Arduino, so not
> a lot I can do to fix things personally. 

And even if you were, the bar for this seems to get higher and higher
all the time.  I got my Ph.D. in computer science (computer vision)
during the 1990s.  At the time I built 'gcc', 'emacs', and a host of
other GNU sofware, plus TeX, from source for the SGI 

Re: Adobe Reader 10 - paper form solution

[Leland Best]

   Hi Greg and All,
   Sadly, haven't had time to read this entire thread so apologies if I'm
   repeating somebody(s).  But ...
   I'm in the US and physically (neurologically) incapable of filling in
   forms via handwriting.  While the most popular forms here are now
   available as "fillable" PDFs, they weren't always, and even now many
   less popular forms, schedules, worksheets, etc. still aren't.  As a
   result, I long ago came up with a "simple" alternative.  The GIMP will
   import a PDF (converting it to an image at whatever resolution one
   desires).  So far, I've been able to import PDFs that 'evince' et al
   have failed on.  Not sure why, but I'm _gussing_ it's because The GIMP
   opens it in some read-only/non-fillable mode.  Anyway, it's then fairly
   easy to add text "layers" to fill in the form.  I like this because
   there's no scanning involved (i.e. no dust, distortions, etc.) so the
   saved form is "perfect".  I can even scan my signature and add it to
   the form where needed.  You can then print the image directly from
   TheGIMP, or export it to a PDF (or, if that doesn't work, export to
   PNG, then use 'pdfjam' to collect all the PDFs into one (admittedly
   huge) final PDF.
   A second, similar, alternative is to import it into InkScape.  Since
   InkScape uses vector graphics the resulting PDFs are much smaller, but
   I find it more cumbersome and time consuming to use.  Trade-offs,
   trade-offs. :^|
   Just my $0.02 USD.
   Cheers
   Leland
   Show quoted text
   --
   ---
   
   Leland C. Best   | Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory'
   is
   [1]lcbpublic@[2]gmail.com  | something you dreamt up after being drunk
   all night.
| -- Isaac Asimov
   ---
   
   On Fri, Mar 19, 2021, 14:47 Greg Knittl <[3]gkni...@sympatico.ca>
   wrote:

 Hi All,
 thanks for all the comments, especially on standards. The Ontario
 Ministry of Finance will send me paper forms. I doubt I would get
 very
 far complaining to the Ombudsman unless I was absolutely blocked
 from
 filing so this is probably the end of the line for my complaint with
 Ontario.
 I will scan the paper and write on it with Imagemagick as I usually
 do
 in these type of situations.
 Greg
 ___
 libreplanet-discuss mailing list
 [4]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
 [5]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discus
 s

References

   1. mailto:lb...@nyx.net
   2. http://gmail.com/
   3. mailto:gkni...@sympatico.ca
   4. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
   5. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss