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

The Day We Fight Back

thedaywefightback.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 192 posts

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#111

Post by chc »

fleitz wrote: post #109
vidarh wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason Aaron gets so much sympathy (EDIT: for what he did as well as for how he was treated) is that 1) a substantial portion of the JSTOR data is public domain , 2) a substantial portion of the rest is work funded with public money where it is controversial that it is only available under copyright. But even disregarding that, I don't get why you are baffled: The GPL is a hack intended to spread freedoms. Many w…

If GPL people are concerned about restrictive licenses why not use BSD or MIT which contain fewer restrictions?

What the GPL restricts is restrictions. Going with BSD allows more restrictions to be placed on the software by others.

It's similar in essence to forbidding slavery — some rhetorician might suggest that it abridges people's freedom to own each other, but the actual intent is to preserve a greater amount of freedom.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#112

Post by rmc »

PavlovsCat wrote: post #110
rmc wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US Constitual protection for privacy only applies to US citizens. Would US citizens be willing to amend it to make it apply to everyone.

Some things in the constitution apply only to citizens, most don't. When it says person, it means person, not citizen. Educating people that this prevalent view is false would already go a long way.

Not quite that clear. There is an (sort of) exemption to the US 4th Amendement warrent requirement for " surveillance is conducted to obtain foreign intelligence for national security purposes and is directed against foreign powers or agents of foreign powers reasonably believed to be located outside the United States"

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#113

Post by agsamek »

fleitz wrote: post #109
vidarh wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason Aaron gets so much sympathy (EDIT: for what he did as well as for how he was treated) is that 1) a substantial portion of the JSTOR data is public domain , 2) a substantial portion of the rest is work funded with public money where it is controversial that it is only available under copyright. But even disregarding that, I don't get why you are baffled: The GPL is a hack intended to spread freedoms. Many w…

If GPL people are concerned about restrictive licenses why not use BSD or MIT which contain fewer restrictions?

I think this is a completely valid question in the context of GPL (quite off-topic, but invoked in the parent thread) and I do not understand why this was downvoted.

GPL might have been about freedom at the time when it was introduced. Nowadays I and most businesses are scanning every piece of software for GPL in order to verify whether it is free.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#114

Post by PavlovsCat »

rmc wrote: post #112
PavlovsCat wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some things in the constitution apply only to citizens, most don't. When it says person, it means person, not citizen. Educating people that this prevalent view is false would already go a long way.

Not quite that clear. There is an (sort of) exemption to the US 4th Amendement warrent requirement for " surveillance is conducted to obtain foreign intelligence for national security purposes and is directed against foreign powers or agents of foreign powers reasonably believed to be located outside the United States"

And this applies to blanket mass surveillance how?

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#115

Post by gaius »

vidarh wrote: post #97
gaius wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, it muddies the issue. I am anti-NSA-spying but I am also anti-stealing-IP... I should point out that I don't think Aaron should have been hounded to his death (tho' equally if he were mentally ill, anything could have pushed him over the edge). But that doesn't make what he did right. It has for 20 years baffled me that people can demand respect for the GPL et al but be happy to ride roughshod over anyone els…

The reason Aaron gets so much sympathy (EDIT: for what he did as well as for how he was treated) is that 1) a substantial portion of the JSTOR data is public domain , 2) a substantial portion of the rest is work funded with public money where it is controversial that it is only available under copyright. But even disregarding that, I don't get why you are baffled: The GPL is a hack intended to spread freedoms. Many w…

Without IP, what stops people incorporating GPL code in their closed source proprietary products? See you can't have your cake and eat it. Either you believe there is a thing called a license which travels with your product and binds the user as to how they can use it, or you don't, there isn't really any middle ground there. The alternative is "everything is public domain!" in which case, no GPL.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#116

Post by gaius »

chc wrote: post #111
fleitz wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If GPL people are concerned about restrictive licenses why not use BSD or MIT which contain fewer restrictions?

What the GPL restricts is restrictions. Going with BSD allows more restrictions to be placed on the software by others. It's similar in essence to forbidding slavery — some rhetorician might suggest that it abridges people's freedom to own each other, but the actual intent is to preserve a greater amount of freedom.

But the underlying principle that all parties would have to agree on is that there are these things called "laws".

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#117

Post by fleitz »

chc wrote: post #111
fleitz wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If GPL people are concerned about restrictive licenses why not use BSD or MIT which contain fewer restrictions?

What the GPL restricts is restrictions. Going with BSD allows more restrictions to be placed on the software by others. It's similar in essence to forbidding slavery — some rhetorician might suggest that it abridges people's freedom to own each other, but the actual intent is to preserve a greater amount of freedom.

I find it funny that restrictions that in practice prevent people from monetizing software is compared to abolishing slavery.

I'm pretty sure the TSA also thinks its restrictions on air travel lead to greater freedom of mobility.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#119

Post by noonespecial »

You know what would be better than putting a banner on a site and tweeting your "outrage"? Giving a buck to the EFF. Or two. Do that other stuff if it makes you feel better, but if you want to make a difference, call a congressman, and give a pittance to people who specialize in doing the same.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#120

Post by tunap »

l33tbro wrote: post #31
niuzeta wrote: post #13

No, it's not fighting back. Making clever memes online to earn a chuckle or two might help spreading awareness , but in reality changing an online avatar and posting memes online won't affect much in real life. What I find strange is that(Please correct me on this one) there just doesn't seem to be a political group of technologist who lobby(the original meaning) against politicians. In truth, technology-related poli…

No. Why is achievement in our culture positioned to always be this 3-act epic like we have to slay the bad guy? try rethinking your approach here and accept that it is actually totally fine to walk home at the end of the day and celebrate a small victory. There are indeed technology consultants that inform these govt policy: they're called lobbyists and their influence is often proportional to how much their self-int…

Not just mere lobbyists, they are 'insiders' who make the right people boatloads of money. They become "Board members" and/or consultants &/or get appointed to seats of power away from the cameras. Hell, they draft the laws that the puppet/script-readers introduce & vote on with much pomp & flourish... or surreptitiously, whatever suits their interests best.

I don't know any but one name on this list, but a quick check leads me to believe we're screwed. DHS Data Privacy Board Members list from '09: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:b2EYh7...

Chairman Howard Beals has no conflict of interest, I suppose: http://www.itif.org/publications/stricter-privacy-regulation...

D. Reed Freeman, ex-CPO of Gator Networks will fight for YOUR right to privacy, I'm sure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claria_Corporation

I'm also pretty sure a majority of people here @ HN will defend THEIR practices of collecting metrics, too. What's the difference? USGuv was tasked to protect & they took it too far, IMO. The Corps, privates & independents with knowledge, coding skills & processing power are tracking for profit... and have taken it too far, IMO.

Post reply on HN