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

181–190 of 192 posts

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#181

Post by betterunix »

gaius wrote: post #115
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…

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.

Or we could create a new system, one not based on the idea that you can own math and poetry, one not based on promoting the interests of publishers, and one that instead encourages the sharing of source code. The GPL is just a way to establish such a system by using the existing approach. There is no reason why we could not scrap copyrights (at least on software) and write a law that codifies the GPL more directly -- say, that any software user has the right to request a copy of the source code for their software.

I'm not saying it is a realistic possibility in today's world, but it is not as though the copyright system is the only system we could have.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#182

Post by betterunix »

nl wrote: post #169
mcherm wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would expect that nearly any supporter of the GPL would also support a change to the law that eliminated copyright restrictions on the use of code. The purpose of the GPL is not to prevent people from modifying and building on the code. The purpose... well, let me quote from http://www.gnu.org/licenses/quick-guide-gplv3.html : There are four freedoms that every user should have: the freedom to use the software for…

I would expect that nearly any supporter of the GPL would also support a change to the law that eliminated copyright restrictions on the use of code. WTF?!? No way! (although to be fair I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "use of code"). Companies would still be free to "protect" their code through secrecy: releasing only the compiled version and not the source code This is exactly what the GPL is designed to avoid…

"This is exactly what the GPL is designed to avoid."

...sort of. Source code access is important, sure, but here are a few more important issues that are basically orthogonal:

* The right to redistribute software

* The right to modify software (without source code?!?! Sure; imagine if I took Windows, removed the license protection code, and distributed that copy to you).

* The right to use software -- this, incredibly, can be a problem:

http://jalopnik.com/192843/robot-let-my-car-go-new-jersey-ga...

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#183

Post by betterunix »

fleitz wrote: post #117
chc wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

"restrictions that in practice prevent people from monetizing software"

http://www.redhat.com/

https://www.google.com/

https://www.facebook.com/

Yup, definitely stopping people from monetizing software!

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#184

Post by betterunix »

guelo wrote: post #156
vinhboy wrote: post #128

People always ask, why can't the progressives make their own Tea Party -- If you read through the responses on this page you'll have your answer. So much doubt and skepticism about everything... It's funny all these people putting down "social networking", when most of us here work for companies who pay a shit ton of money to advertise and gain traction on "social networks". Then, on top of that, there are many of us…

this isn't a "progressive" issue, it cuts across partisan lines.

Not really. This is a left-versus-right issue. Unfortunately, most major party politicians are on the right wing of the spectrum.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#185

Post by betterunix »

pinaceae wrote: post #22

as a non-US citizen this won't change anything for me. "free society" here should be really re-worded to "free US society". as long as there is a intelligence apparatus in the US at all, spying on the rest of the world will continue. by definition. the NSA is monitoring all internet traffic as it would be really hard to know beforehand if it only pertains to US citizens. not sure what exactly you're trying to achieve…

Maybe your government should be working to promote the security of its citizens. The US is not alone here, despite being a bad actor -- did your government work to promote widespread use of good cryptography, or did your country's law enforcement agencies whine about how hard it would be to wiretap people? Should I, as a US citizen, feel more comfortable with my personal data being stored in your country than you feel about yours being stored in mine?

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#186

Post by whatevsbro »

marcosdumay wrote: post #146
whatevsbro wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but it's true. Think about it for a moment. They operate in complete secrecy behind the scenes. You have no power over them, but they have massive power over you. Clearly, neither the NSA nor the government are accountable to you or people in general because you simply have no recourse against any injustice they commit against you. If the government imprisons you without due process, for example, you're effecti…

> They operate in complete secrecy behind the scenes. That's not an intrinsical property of governments. In fact, it's even possible to prove that a government is transparent (I doubt any current one is), you just need to publish all the money transfers.

The people in charge do not want transparency, because that would interfere with what they want to do: live large at everyone else's expense, wield power and influence, and take bribes. This is why there will never be government transparency.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#187

Post by chc »

marcosdumay wrote: post #141
SoftwareMaven wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not required to give that first customer the source code with BSD. The only companies that make money on software containing GPL'd code are doing it server-side with pre-GPLV3 or AGPL'd code. I've worked at a lot of companies that used and created open source software; and the rules are invariably the same: No GPL'd software allowed into the source tree, period.

You are not required to give that first customer the source code with BSD. That's only different if you are selling other people's software. If so, why should anybody have any simpaty?

It's also true if you are selling original software that borrows one line of code from somebody else's software.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#188

Post by dllthomas »

chc wrote: post #187
marcosdumay wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not required to give that first customer the source code with BSD. That's only different if you are selling other people's software. If so, why should anybody have any simpaty?

It's also true if you are selling original software that borrows one line of code from somebody else's software.

You could conceivably try to claim fair use, in that case, although it would undoubtedly be easier (and easy enough) to replace that one line with something original.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#189

Post by whatevsbro »

djur wrote: post #159
mirano wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you vote, you actually give credibility to, and thus your implicit acceptance of the results, whether or not they are in your favour. You play the game that is stacked 100% in their favour, and you cannot expect to win. Your vote or that of even 1 million (or even 10 million) other people will not change 1 single micron of the overall outcome. Think of all the well-intentioned people in the past, say 100 years o…

There hasn't been a large-scale violent uprising in the United States for almost 150 years. The US and state governments of today have continuity from that point. In that time period legitimate democratic processes have brought about the 40-hour work week; the abolition of child labor; substantial improvements in the legal rights and protection of women, racial minorities, and sexual minorities; regulatory systems to…

> modern democracies are by and large the most humane, least violent, and most responsive governments in human history.

That's because their tax cattle is still docile. You see, as long as people remain obedient and calm, governments don't need to get violent. That's the way outright slavery works too: a slave-master only whips his slaves when they resist him.

Make no mistake though, governments are not your friends. They don't give a fuck about your well-being, and they're not here to help humanity. It's the exact opposite.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#190

Post by Karunamon »

whatevsbro wrote: post #167
Karunamon wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They operate in complete secrecy behind the scenes. You have no power over them, but they have massive power over you. We vote these people into office. We have the power. The government is people - just people we've decided get extra power so they can get things done. Please, please, please don't ever forget this. The moment you start thinking of the government as some impenetrable adversary, you've already lost. B…

> We vote these people into office. We have the power. That's exactly the way they want you to think. To imagine you can affect "policy" through writing something on a piece of paper and dropping it in a box. See how absurd that idea sounds when put like that? -But that's exactly how it's supposed to work. You realize that a piece of paper with text on it doesn't actually compel any politician to do anything for you…

Over here in reality, it works pretty much as you say in your first paragraph (sans snark). Did you forget the popular outcry that got SOPA killed? Did you forget all of the positive things that have happened over the past few decades?

Enjoy being a defeatist apathetic loon, I guess.

Post reply on HN