Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trump’s new social media platform found using Mastodon code

blog.joinmastodon.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 551 posts

Re: Trump’s new social media platform found using Mastodon code

#161

Post by hn_throwaway_69 »

rp1 wrote: post #33
jrootabega wrote: post #30

> As far as personal feelings are concerned, of course we would prefer if people so antithetical to our values did not use and benefit from our labour And sensible people would prefer that license violations would be published and pursued fairly, and personal feelings kept personal, rather than creating a soft list of people and perspectives whose online/computing freedom is less important than others.

That sounds like a personal feeling.

I think this is a tu quoque fallacy.

In my view, it is OK to invoke personal feelings about whether personal feelings should be invoked in relation to the enforcement of a software license.

Re: Trump’s new social media platform found using Mastodon code

#162

Post by red_trumpet »

d_theorist wrote: post #32

Are the quoted terms actually incorrect or in violation of the license? >all source code ... are owned or controlled by us or licensed to us, and are protected by copyright and trademark laws That's correct isn't it? The mastodon code would be licensed to them under the AGPL. So I am not sure this should be a source of "worry" in and of itself. The potential issue appears to be that they have modified the mastodon co…

> On Oct 26, we sent a formal letter to Truth Social’s chief legal officer, requesting the source code to be made publicly available in compliance with the license. According to AGPLv3, after being notified by the copyright holder, Truth Social has 30 days to comply or the license may be permanently revoked.

IANAL, but this reads to me as if they don't comply in time[1], they might lose the license, rendering the statement incorrect.

[1] I don't know if they have to comply in 30 days, if the service is currently offline. Maybe they have 30 days after release?

Re: Trump’s new social media platform found using Mastodon code

#163

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

macspoofing wrote: post #151
geewee wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? In what world does using software to marginalize people or mislead the public create a better world?

>In what world does using software to marginalize people or mislead the public create a better world? The road to hell ... something something ... good intentions. Who defines what 'marginalization of people' means (a strange term if you really think about it), and why would you think they would get that definition right?

> Who defines what 'marginalization of people' means

The software creators, which seems very reasonable to me. This isn't some arbitrary judge deeming what is marginalizing or not. This is the creators of the software saying "We don't want to build something that complete dickweeds can use for evil."

Don't like their definition of "dickweeds" or "evil"? Fine, build your own shit then.

Re: Trump’s new social media platform found using Mastodon code

#164

Post by d_theorist »

red_trumpet wrote: post #162
d_theorist wrote: post #32

Are the quoted terms actually incorrect or in violation of the license? >all source code ... are owned or controlled by us or licensed to us, and are protected by copyright and trademark laws That's correct isn't it? The mastodon code would be licensed to them under the AGPL. So I am not sure this should be a source of "worry" in and of itself. The potential issue appears to be that they have modified the mastodon co…

> On Oct 26, we sent a formal letter to Truth Social’s chief legal officer, requesting the source code to be made publicly available in compliance with the license. According to AGPLv3, after being notified by the copyright holder, Truth Social has 30 days to comply or the license may be permanently revoked. IANAL, but this reads to me as if they don't comply in time[1], they might lose the license, rendering the sta…

Agreed that the statement would become incorrect if this outcome happens. Nevertheless, at the moment I believe the statement to be accurate.

Re: Trump’s new social media platform found using Mastodon code

#165

Post by nkozyra »

refurb wrote: post #157
nkozyra wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would say the US drastically changed a few ways: 1) the public’s perception of the media, 2) the US strategy with regards to China, 3) a significant adjustment of tax strategy and offshoring of profits, 4) healthcare regulations. These are ephemeral changes, the type that flap back and forth frequently with presidential changes. That's why things like ACA are far more monumental - they're codified, much harder to…

3 out of the 4 are backed by legislation?

I count two. Regardless, but not the kind that has (or would have to) survive constitutional challenge. In four years they barely made a dent on ACA, and that was a critical part of the mission statement.

Either could be reversed, as has happened in previous administration changes. Our tax code and rates are pretty malleable, if the last forty years is any indication.

Re: Trump’s new social media platform found using Mastodon code

#166

Post by [deleted] »

geewee wrote: post #146
roenxi wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If all software was licensed that way, 5-15 years would pass then suddenly there'd be a whole bunch of "Wow, Stallman was right again! We should have been using free software licenses!" style articles. Restricting software use to only people approved by the creators is a terrible idea. Society has to operate with some level of trust that even people we disagree with, using methods we don't approve of, have the potent…

Why? In what world does using software to marginalize people or mislead the public create a better world?

[deleted]

Re: Trump’s new social media platform found using Mastodon code

#167

Post by jraph »

d_theorist wrote: post #32

Are the quoted terms actually incorrect or in violation of the license? >all source code ... are owned or controlled by us or licensed to us, and are protected by copyright and trademark laws That's correct isn't it? The mastodon code would be licensed to them under the AGPL. So I am not sure this should be a source of "worry" in and of itself. The potential issue appears to be that they have modified the mastodon co…

Besides the source code, attributions are missing if this quote is complete. The quote is not wrong I guess, but things are probably missing so the text in its entirety could be considered wrong, I guess too.

Re: Trump’s new social media platform found using Mastodon code

#168

Post by bjt2n3904 »

s7r wrote: post #121

In terms of "antithetical values", the machine learning project ml5js.org actually did something about this. They bound their open-source license to a Code of Conduct¹, which forbids the use of their ML software for (1) discriminating against marginalized communities, (2) building tools that disingenuously manipulate public opinion, (3) building tools of mass surveillance and prediction to repress the rights of peopl…

Wasn't Hacker News all up in arms over the SQLite "Code of Conduct" that borrowed too heavily from the Bible?

This is similar nonsense. You might as well have a "Don't Be Evil™" code of conduct that is as follows:

1. You may not use this software to do evil.

2. I decide what is evil.

Re: Trump’s new social media platform found using Mastodon code

#169

Post by [deleted] »

jlangenauer wrote: post #152
roenxi wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If all software was licensed that way, 5-15 years would pass then suddenly there'd be a whole bunch of "Wow, Stallman was right again! We should have been using free software licenses!" style articles. Restricting software use to only people approved by the creators is a terrible idea. Society has to operate with some level of trust that even people we disagree with, using methods we don't approve of, have the potent…

Why? The creators created the software, they can put any conditions they please on how others might use it. They're under no moral or legal obligation to allow people to use the fruits of their labors, except as they permit.

[deleted]

Re: Trump’s new social media platform found using Mastodon code

#170

Post by jrootabega »

geewee wrote: post #146
roenxi wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If all software was licensed that way, 5-15 years would pass then suddenly there'd be a whole bunch of "Wow, Stallman was right again! We should have been using free software licenses!" style articles. Restricting software use to only people approved by the creators is a terrible idea. Society has to operate with some level of trust that even people we disagree with, using methods we don't approve of, have the potent…

Why? In what world does using software to marginalize people or mislead the public create a better world?

One perspective is that entities which want to do bad things with software will find a way, even if it means writing it themselves or buying it. Trying to build protections against that into the license will create a heavy enforcement burden and provide a point of compromise that could be used to target unpopular or inconvenient, but not "bad", users of the software. Making a free license deliberately allows the possibility that the software could be used for bad purposes.
Post reply on HN