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

The Javascript Trap

gnu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 117 posts

Re: The Javascript Trap

#81

Post by critic »

azanar wrote: post #70
critic wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Whose object code? Is it talking about my object code or the library's? Ten lines per function, per header, per library, per program? Edit: I think you didn't understand LGPL yourself either. I think in the quoted lines, "object code" refers to your code, and accompanying them with a copy of GPL refers to having to release your code under GPL. Or do you think you only have to say you release it under GPL and not…

The object code is the aggregate of your code and the library's header code. If you have just your object code, you are not bound by the license of the library, then you don't need to include it. If you have just the library header code, then you are not incorporating it into anything else, and have no obligations by the license. If you have both the library header code incorporated into your object code , then you a…

By accompanying your object code with GPL/LGPL, you are promising your customers that your code is GPL/LGPL, i.e. you will be bound to open your code.

The fact that your understanding of the license is different shows just how sneaky and obfuscated LGPL is.

Re: The Javascript Trap

#82

Post by critic »

dasil003 wrote: post #77
critic wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But your planting of a tree doesn't automatically prevent the farmer you bought the apple from from making any money. If I have to release my code under GPL, I can't make money charging thousands for it (low volume type of app). If I can't make money from it, I won't spend years developing it. Not having the app would make it harder for some pharma scientist somewhere to cure cancer. Everyone loses. Communism doesn't…

You are not forced to release your code under the GPL. You can spend years developing it and release it however you want. However if you choose to release under the GPL you will be standing on the shoulders of giants. You will have whole new avenues of development opportunity opened up to you as a result. "Communism" does work in the sense of the Linux ecosystem that you see around you every day. Not only that, but c…

> It's not clear at all why you think you should be entitled to that code

I never said I was. In the GNU utopia, Linux killed MS and all libraries are GPL.

My options are:

1. Spend years writing apps that help cure cancer, GPL them and starve. (not exactly hypothetical)

2. Develop some Web apps that are not bound by GPL. Make money.

What do you think I will choose in your GNU communist utopia?

Re: The Javascript Trap

#83

Post by critic »

Somebody, please save RMS, write an Emacs mode that inserts spaces into JavaScript and converts single char names into made up longer ones! For extra bonus, insert comments that talk about how if you are not using GNU, you are a slave! A slave, I tell ya!

Re: The Javascript Trap

#84

Post by bmj »

jodrellblank wrote: post #71
bmj wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, and I'm not sure I follow this (the Obfuscript bit). You _do_ have the source code, albeit a bit difficult to read. I'm guessing there are plenty of GPL'ed programs out there with horrible style and horrible documentation.

Difficult to read or not, there's not much point because you don't have the legal permission to change it, contribute to it, derive code from it, etc. We have the right to improve GPL'd programs with horrible documentation.

True enough.

Re: The Javascript Trap

#85

Post by critic »

vinutheraj wrote: post #64
alecco wrote: post #41

Anybody who dares call herself or himself a hacker should respect RMS. The name calling on this page is disgusting. You don't know the guy, you don't have any thing on him. He doesn't force anybody to use his licenses. He is just warning users of a proprietary software trap, that's all. If you happen to serve this kind of website it's stupid to just get into the name calling and instead perhaps state clearly your Jav…

Exactly, I am sure a large number of the YC guys use free software on their servers and workstations, yet how many have given monetary support to the FSF in the form of donations or anything ? I won't be surprised to know the answer will be too few. Anyway, just give the man some respect, he is somewhat an extremist, but if it weren't for this guy you wouldn't be starting all these startups on shoestring budgets and…

> but if it weren't for this guy you

We'd be using OS X and FreeBSD instead of Linux. Who's laughing now?

Re: The Javascript Trap

#86

Post by jacktang »

critic wrote: post #85
vinutheraj wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, I am sure a large number of the YC guys use free software on their servers and workstations, yet how many have given monetary support to the FSF in the form of donations or anything ? I won't be surprised to know the answer will be too few. Anyway, just give the man some respect, he is somewhat an extremist, but if it weren't for this guy you wouldn't be starting all these startups on shoestring budgets and…

> but if it weren't for this guy you We'd be using OS X and FreeBSD instead of Linux. Who's laughing now?

I still believe that business will kill hacker culture.

Re: The Javascript Trap

#87

Post by arebop »

critic wrote: post #81
azanar wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The object code is the aggregate of your code and the library's header code. If you have just your object code, you are not bound by the license of the library, then you don't need to include it. If you have just the library header code, then you are not incorporating it into anything else, and have no obligations by the license. If you have both the library header code incorporated into your object code , then you a…

By accompanying your object code with GPL/LGPL, you are promising your customers that your code is GPL/LGPL, i.e. you will be bound to open your code. The fact that your understanding of the license is different shows just how sneaky and obfuscated LGPL is.

If that were true, why would would the FSF say that "using the Lesser GPL permits use of the library in proprietary programs; using the ordinary GPL for a library makes it available only for free programs" [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html]? The LGPL is not designed to trick you into using the moral equivalent of the GPL; it's designed to occupy the middle ground between GPL and BSD licenses.

Re: The Javascript Trap

#88

Post by ced »

tsally wrote: post #39

There's a disturbing lack of understanding in this community about free software, the GPL and other licences, and RMS himself. Of course Stallman is an extremist. Every leader of such a movement by definition must be an extremist, even if it makes them look foolish. The ACLU for example takes cases that make them look like a joke, but they are forced to because they must exhibit unwavering believe in their ideals. As…

Every leader of such a movement by definition must be an extremist, even if it makes them look foolish

Why? RMS's movement would benefit most from convincing us, as developers, to contribute to FOSS. I pray that being a foolish-looking extremist isn't the best way to do that.

Re: The Javascript Trap

#89

Post by shader »

I like freedom. Freedom is good. The only question in this instance is - freedom for whom? Freedom for the developer to write code without comments, so that you can't hack it? Or freedom for you to read his code? I think that javascript currently embodies both of these freedoms in the best possible way. The author does not force you to execute his scripts; by your http request you asked for them. At the same time he is not being forced by you to make his source code "intelligible."

The implementation of JavaScript is most likely open source, and the script's code is obviously available. Am I missing something? Is he saying that it's not "Open Source" if it doesn't have enough comments?

Trying to prevent people from releasing source code without comments because it's not easily hackable is a bit much. Almost everything about RMS is "a bit much" though, and that's why so many hackers like him ;)

Re: The Javascript Trap

#90

Post by trapper »

randallsquared wrote: post #51
mattmaroon wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's bullshit. He's not fighting any good fight, and even if he were, he's doing it in a way (very much like PETA) that makes sure he's seen as an unpalatable nutjob by any sane individual. His own extremism will prevent him from accomplishing anything.

He's already accomplished a very great deal, exactly by doing things in the way you say will prevent him from accomplishing anything. Of course, you may believe that this is incidental.

What has he really accomplished? All he has done is shift the focus from desktop development to SAAS models. Why do you think all software companies are doing SAAS now? We can use gpl on the server and not have to release our code. Just like google. You get the best of both worlds. FOSS becomes the infrastructure.

FOSS can't compete in this space because they can't afford the servers - you have to have revenue to make it in SAAS.

Post reply on HN