• 0 Posts
  • 92 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 28th, 2023

help-circle







  • But the fact that the majority (or perhaps less than half now) of the responses literally prove the point I am trying to make proves my point downvotes or not.

    You have to remember the people who would literally unironically make such a post that proves my post are the densest of the dense.

    Most sexists, while dense, are less dense than a black hole and would not prove my point for me under such a post.






  • EDIT: Look at the responses to this comment for the proof.

    100%

    It’s really bad and lemmy is really in denial.

    Sexism here is much worse than it was on Reddit.

    It feels like 2008 Reddit here sexism wise, except instead of Ron Paul libertarians tooting their horns everywhere we have heavy tracked vehicle enthusiasts.

    I did hope lemmy having a left leaning culture would help but it does not.

    Try making any post that focuses on situations uniquely or disproportionally experienced by women and you get mostly “everyone has that why think about women” or “what about men” or “men have it worst” responses.


  • Ask Cisco how they feel about it. There is a precedence of companies using copy left licensed software and the community benefiting from it.

    If companies are just going to be blatantly criminal and violate software licenses they were going to do that anyways. I’m not sure how much experience you have working in or with mega corps but the ones I have worked with in the past HATE the idea of opening themselves up to being so blatantly liable.

    When I worked in big tech we had a license scanner that checked the libraries we were using. Anything strongly copyleft would be flagged and we would be contacted by legal.

    You might have experienced working with companies that act otherwise. I encourage you to call them out, maybe work with the FSF to get another Cisco style ruling.

    Funny you mention ZFS though. It’s not the GPL that was the issue. It is CDDL that’s incompatible. GPL is generally comparable with foss licenses. MIT, MPL, Apache, BSD all are comparable. It’s just CDDL that’s incompatible with copyleft in general.

    If you think the community will benefit more from MIT licensed software than copyleft I think you need to look harder at the modern corporate world. Corporations are not altruistic.

    This being said I’m not sure there is much more to be said here. You’ve gone to saying I believe in magic and that there are corporate GPL conspiracies. I just don’t see the proof and I think there is not much more to be gained by such talk.


  • If “theft” is your only concern yes. It’s a common misconception that copyleft licenses stops rich companies from stealing. It does not.

    I am more concerned about societal enrichment vs corporate enrichment.

    If you release some code under MIT that a company finds useful, they could take it, improve it a bit, and resell it back to the community. This enriches the company at the expense of the community. Without the original code the company could have never taken it as a basis to sell and the community that wrote the code gets nothing.

    If you release that same code as AGPL the company can take it, improve it and sell it to the community. BUT the difference is that the community now benefits from those improvements too. Maybe more improvements happen. Maybe a second company takes those improvements and sells them too. The community would have all the improvements and would benefit from greater competition.

    With copy left licenses. The community is enriched and companies are enriched.

    With MIT style licenses. Companies are enriched at the expense of the community.



  • In terms of algorithms, nothing. But you were the one who mentioned algorithms. I am speaking of code in general. I do want for persons to contribute back to the community if they use community sourced code. I don’t think we can trust corporations to be altruistic.

    This all being said in your earlier message you were implying it’s all about ego. I was just saying it is not about ego.

    For me it’s all about community resources and societal enrichment.




  • Then why not LGPL or MPL 2.0? They could use your code as is too. I’ve worked in major tech companies and they are ok with these. They just don’t like GPL for obvious reasons.

    Obviously too is that you have the right to choose how to license your code, but I don’t think it makes sense to use MIT when LGPL and MPL 2.0:

    1. Exist
    2. Are accepted by tech corps for internal use.

    If you don’t believe me look at your corps license inclusion policy.