this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2024
796 points (97.8% liked)

linuxmemes

21304 readers
1096 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
  •  

    Please report posts and comments that break these rules!


    Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't fork-bomb your computer.

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
     
    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [–] johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world 59 points 2 months ago (13 children)

    This seems like complaining that the BSD license does exactly what it intends to do.

    [–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago (12 children)

    Yeah, as if the authors had no idea what terms the license has....

    [–] WormFood@lemmy.world 26 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    ignorance is one thing, but it's a whole nother level of loser behaviour to intentionally do unpaid work for big tech companies in your free time

    [–] johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago (1 children)

    "Unpaid work" is pretty much all OSS development. "Here's a thing I made, anyone can use it for whatever they want as long as they give credit" is a very simple philosophy. Not everybody who works on OSS is opposed to the existence of closed source commercial software, and rather a lot of people don't like viral licenses like the GPL. Really out of line to call people who contribute their time and effort to making free software available to everyone losers just because you disagree with their choice of license.

    [–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

    I take it that you’re in the first camp

    You’re doing it for yourself/for fun/to better humanity

    If some corporate fucks want to abuse that then it’s their problem not yours

    [–] thevoidzero@lemmy.world 22 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Publishing it under GPL does benefit the humanity because any improvement on it will be also available to everyone. Letting corps take your work and put a monetary/legal block for people to use freely doesn't seem like benefiting humanity that much.

    [–] Flipper@feddit.org 1 points 2 months ago

    No, it will not be available to everyone. Just the clients of the corpo and they can request the source. If you're not a client, you still have no rights.

    [–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com -3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

    What if your open source code is awful and is unusable, and a company comes in and makes it actually useful? What if it's used in a medical device that saves hundreds of peoples lives every day?

    You've now gone from free but unusable, to also fee an unusable, but in addition to paid and actually useful.

    [–] thevoidzero@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    First of all, in many cases, writing new code is lot easier than trying to modify/salvage old code from someone else. Unless you can just plug it in for a modular function in that case your code is not useless.

    And if they think your code is valuable enough to save that many people after they improve it, they can approach you for dual license or other agreements. They pay people with patent all the time, so they can do the same for people who's volunteering their time for open source.

    [–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

    You're clearly someone who never contributed to open source.

    [–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

    You're making it for fun. You've achieved your desired fun, and lost nothing if some rando takes it and makes another fun project, or big mega corp uses it.

    What's gonna stop them from just stealing it anyways? Why would they care about Joe Shmoe when they have infinite number the lawers you have? Also AI kinda makes this irrelevant because it will rewrite the code in a way that's probably not protected, or at least provide enough shielding that their 10000 lawyers will.

    Also also, what about all the mega corps that already use linux? That's free an open source and they're free to run their proprietary code on it. If you've ever contributed to linux, or any tool that's built into a distro you're not this supposed loser who's done free work for a big tech company. It's silly to complain about this.

    [–] ricdeh@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

    GPL enforcement has, in fact, been very successful so far. I recommend this Wikipedia entry.

    And then there is the very successful lawsuit from the Software Freedom Conservancy against Vizio.

    load more comments (7 replies)
    load more comments (7 replies)