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

Anytype – local-first, P2P Notion alternative

anytype.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 281 posts

Re: Anytype – local-first, P2P Notion alternative

#91

Post by andrewshadura »

number6 wrote: post #87
andrewshadura wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You deny your users the most basic freedom there is, the freedom to use your software for any purpose without discrimination. This is wrong, and so is your attempt to misuse and redefine the term "open source software".

This is the second time today that someone mistakes open source and free software. See: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.... I don't blame you, it's a bit schadenfreude on my part because "open source" companies try to dress as free software but aren't

No. Open source is the same as free software. It is a marketing term for free software, that defines the same concept in more practical terms. If you actually read the article you linked, you would have known that.

Re: Anytype – local-first, P2P Notion alternative

#92

Post by sharipova »

menacingly wrote: post #31

This is really nice, but I think the perennial curse of technology people is producing " , but with " People want a thing, not an ideal, and they'll sell their soul to get the thing. At this point, it's actually being surprised by this that is the ludicrous position. Philosophies are a differentiator for a very small portion of population. If you want them to buy into ideals, you've taken on two problems: Make a thin…

(co-founder of anytype)

we agree, we have an internal mantra "people use products, not protocols". This does not diminish the importance of philosophies. The way we design our product and protocols is based on principles, because of the role software started to play in our lives - the second order consequences of the architectural choices lead to the results we get in our social life. We are believers of fundamental digital freedoms (privacy, ability to connect with those we trust) and importance of user and creator autonomy from the software provider (these freedoms to be governed by us not by software companies). We used these principles to guide our architectural decisions.

At the same time, we fully understand that if we want to build something meaningful we need to do the hardest part. Turn our ideals into the UX that would be attractive on its own. We are focusing on that. Hope to show that the p2p protocols can turned into a product that is fun to use. We are just making our baby steps towards this (not there yet)

Re: Anytype – local-first, P2P Notion alternative

#93

Post by rebeccaskinner »

pronkin wrote: post #62
pgeorgi wrote: post #28

Note, their idea[0] of "open source" doesn't match the popular Open Source Definition [1] [0] https://github.com/anyproto/anytype-kotlin/blob/main/LICENSE... [1] https://opensource.org/osd/

Co-founder of anytype is here. The most of are repos are fully open-source. We have our philosophy regarding open source here https://blog.anytype.io/our-open-philosophy/ Happy to discuss concerns regarding our approach.

Using the term Open Source for a product when most of the code is under a license that isn’t Open Source feels dishonest to me. The product you build is certainly yours to release however you see fit, but if I’m looking for open source software and I find this I’m going to be extremely skeptical of everything you say.

On top of that, the license itself is actually incredibly restrictive. I’m not a lawyer, but my read of the section on economic value seems very broad:

> does not include uses where the Software facilitates any transaction of economic value other than on Allowed Networks.

My read of “facilitates any transaction of economic value” means that I would be in violation if I used this to keep track of trading cards, made a grocery list, or tried to keep track of what I want to buy my friends for their birthdays. At least it would if I installed this on my home server and accessed it from the couch on mh phone.

Re: Anytype – local-first, P2P Notion alternative

#95

Post by pgeorgi »

pronkin wrote: post #62
pgeorgi wrote: post #28

Note, their idea[0] of "open source" doesn't match the popular Open Source Definition [1] [0] https://github.com/anyproto/anytype-kotlin/blob/main/LICENSE... [1] https://opensource.org/osd/

Co-founder of anytype is here. The most of are repos are fully open-source. We have our philosophy regarding open source here https://blog.anytype.io/our-open-philosophy/ Happy to discuss concerns regarding our approach.

The problem is that proprietary licenses (such as Source Available) are viral: whatever they touch becomes proprietary.

As such, "most repos are open source" (from what I can see: MIT, some forked ones Apache 2.0) is nice, but the end product still isn't open source according to OSD.

There are people who value using "Open Source" for OSD-compliant licenses only (I tend to agree with that notion to keep things clear), but I didn't really want to discuss this: It's your project, after all, license as you wish.

I just wanted to provide a heads-up that the use of "open source" in the header here (and the front page on your site) doesn't match the expectations of a bunch of folks, so they know whether to look closer or not based on that.

I see how making the entire situation transparent muddies the message, but "Everything is Source Available, many parts are Open Source" would already clear things up a lot.

Re: Anytype – local-first, P2P Notion alternative

#97

Post by andrewshadura »

number6 wrote: post #87
andrewshadura wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You deny your users the most basic freedom there is, the freedom to use your software for any purpose without discrimination. This is wrong, and so is your attempt to misuse and redefine the term "open source software".

This is the second time today that someone mistakes open source and free software. See: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.... I don't blame you, it's a bit schadenfreude on my part because "open source" companies try to dress as free software but aren't

More specifically, their license doesn't meet these criteria of open source software (which are the same as the Debian free software guidelines):

5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups

6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor

Re: Anytype – local-first, P2P Notion alternative

#98

Post by requilence »

master-lincoln wrote: post #80
sharipova wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(co-founder of anytype) our main promises are privacy, end-to-end encryption, user controlled keys, self-hosting, p2p sync - all of which should add up to what we can user autonomy from the software provider which we believe to be important. To prove these claims the best way is open the source code. As promises of encryption and ownership stay promises unless you can be sure of it. That was one main motivation and w…

Is there a way to make sure I am using the code you published and not a different version?

We do releases in the Github Actions CI. So you can inspect the CI logs and published artefacts(desktop/android). Then you can compare the binaries checksums. I would appreciate ideas on how we can make it more transparent

Re: Anytype – local-first, P2P Notion alternative

#99

Post by pronkin »

wallmountedtv wrote: post #71
pgeorgi wrote: post #28

Note, their idea[0] of "open source" doesn't match the popular Open Source Definition [1] [0] https://github.com/anyproto/anytype-kotlin/blob/main/LICENSE... [1] https://opensource.org/osd/

When will VC companies stop conflating source available with open source? It's even worse than just being closed source as it's trying to pander to a group for money, and without any respect to the actual values of what they are saying.

Our philosophy surrounding open-source is uncomplicated and clear. All essential protocols and data formats are subject to the MIT license. However, considering our clients' needs and with the MongoDB situation as a reference, we must maintain some degree of defensibility.

Our objective is to foster a collaborative atmosphere, co-creating with the community. The size of the community matters to us; when it reaches a significant scale, we want to make collective decisions regarding licensing, reflecting a democratic approach.

Antype, a creation of our non-profit organization, is aimed at sustainability rather than becoming another digital ghost. Our mission isn't simply to exist, but to thrive and make meaningful contributions to the open-source landscape. By intertwining our growth with that of our community, we're setting the stage for a sustainable future.

Re: Anytype – local-first, P2P Notion alternative

#100

Post by pgeorgi »

number6 wrote: post #87
andrewshadura wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You deny your users the most basic freedom there is, the freedom to use your software for any purpose without discrimination. This is wrong, and so is your attempt to misuse and redefine the term "open source software".

This is the second time today that someone mistakes open source and free software. See: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.... I don't blame you, it's a bit schadenfreude on my part because "open source" companies try to dress as free software but aren't

You replied to "You deny your users the most basic freedom there is, the freedom to use your software for any purpose without discrimination." and caim that open source isn't about that.

Let's see https://opensource.org/definition-annotated/, _the_ definition for open source, specifically the sections titled "No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups" and "No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor":

"The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons."

"The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research."

So what GP claimed seems to be exactly Open Source's point, no?

Post reply on HN