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

261–270 of 551 posts

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

#261

Post by ncallaway »

einpoklum wrote: post #100
nkozyra wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But for all that superficial posturing, he accomplished very little of his agenda and generally ended up trying to play ball anyway. The anti-establishment game lasted until he entered the white House. His primary accomplishment was building a base of angry people.

> he accomplished very little of his agenda That depends on what you believe Trump's agenda was. I hope you're not taking his 2016 electoral campaign statements regarding what his agenda is at face value...

> I hope you're not taking his 2016 electoral campaign statements regarding what his agenda is at face value...

Is that a joke? What on earth would you judge someone on (with regards to their agenda) other than the commitments they make as a candidate?

I don’t care about whether someone accomplished a “secret unpublished” agenda, if it’s all revealed after the fact.

Obviously, I care about the changes made during the presidential term, but when it comes to “evaluating whether they fulfilled their agenda”, it seems farcical to say “I hope you weren’t actually considering the public commitments they made about their agenda”

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

#262

Post by andrepd »

eterevsky wrote: post #186
jlangenauer wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They can, which doesn't mean they should. Also, I think a person has a mortal obligation to allow that their political position is at least partially flawed.

I don't get it. What does "allowing that one's politics is partially flawed" have to do with not wanting one's project used for surveillance, weapons control, etc?

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

#263

Post by mlyle »

Dumblydorr wrote: post #251
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…

Is it really a terrible idea to restrict your software from being used to control weaponry? To spread lies about science, like climate change denial or vaccine lies? To host child pornography sharing? These above scenarios amount to handing criminals and bad actors powerful technological tools which allow them to increase harms done to society. This is a software company's choice, there is no law that states a compan…

> Is it really a terrible idea to restrict your software from being used to control weaponry? To spread lies about science, like climate change denial or vaccine lies?

No, but there's a terrible slippery slope to have the creator able to make value judgments about uses of the software after the software is adopted and exert power over the users this way.

> To host child pornography sharing?

I think it's a bit of hyperbole once we're extending this value judgment to conduct that is already otherwise illegal. Is someone breaking the law to host child pornography and facing criminal charges going to be deterred by the possibility of civil damages from license noncompliance?

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

#264

Post by knorker »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #117
cedilla wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, you don't have any obligation to enforce your rights. There is the well-known exception of trademark law, but that's in the nature of the matter. If PepsiCo sells Coca-Cola and the Coca-Cola company doesn't react, then the trade mark obviously doesn't allow customers to identify genuine Coca-Cola.

You don't have an obligation and in theory (and only in theory) it doesn't matter but a history of doing it anyway sure as shit helps in court.

Does it? This is the first I've heard of it.

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

#265

Post by thinkcontext »

HKH2 wrote: post #160
thinkcontext wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's not fading. He's firmly in control of the party and is purging those that won't repeat his election lies.

What a surprise that those people happen to be neocons. Somehow we're supposed to believe George W. Bush is a good guy after all.

I'm confused, what do GWB or neocons have to do with a willingness to lie about elections? Are you saying those two are bad because they aren't willing to lie about it?

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

#266

Post by lupire »

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…

Good for them. It's not open source; it's licensed to their current friends.

Meanwhile, people who aren't lifetime friends of the copyright owners aren't going to use software whose license can be withdrawn at any time based on a dispute. People don't like when Oracle or MS or Intel or any corpo tries that, so they shouldn't accept it from anyone else for anything they care about.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5138866

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

#267

Post by kkjjkgjjgg »

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…

So who decides what is "disingeniously manipulating public opinion"?

I think for many people that statement is too vague and hence the risk of using that software is too high.

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

#269

Post by Ardren »

HideousKojima wrote: post #210
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…

That's a surefire way to make sure proprietary software solutions win: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/programs-must-not-limit-freed... >I've stated some of my views about other political issues, about activities that are or aren't unjust. Your views might differ, and that's precisely the point. If we accepted programs with usage restrictions as part of a free operating system such as GNU, people would come up with lo…

I don't think their choice of license had much to do with losing the battle with "proprietary software"...

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

#270

Post by andrepd »

dmos62 wrote: post #203
jlangenauer wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The creators are themselves fruit of the society. It's short-sighted to grant them the privilege to withhold their fruit.

Sure, but we do that all the time don't we? It's called private property.

I agree with your intention, but there's a balance to be struck between individual contributions and those of wider society.

Post reply on HN