191–200 of 337 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whenever people say that MIT or GPL licenses are a good idea I point out projects like this. Only humans should have freedom zero. Corporations and robots must pay.
The behavior of corporations is shameful. After all, people in these companies don't work for free and are able to spend a lot of money for other services.
Reading the release history[1]. I'm kind of shocked that sudo gets active development and monthly releases. I would have thought that something this old and venerated would have been "done" long ago. 1: https://www.sudo.ws/releases/devel/
But also sudo has A LOT of features that 95% of people don't use. Just checkout `man sudo` to get a sense for this. And it includes plugins like the popular visudo plugin. You can see from the release cadence that real improvements continue to be made. Though it is a bit more work to secure a moving target.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whenever people say that MIT or GPL licenses are a good idea I point out projects like this. Only humans should have freedom zero. Corporations and robots must pay.
> Corporations and robots must pay. Greenpeace is a (non-profit) corporation. Unions are corporations. Municipalities. Colleges and universities. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person Should they have to pay?
From time to time, I would reflect on the fact that Microsoft and other commercial suppliers were getting paid for providing services to us, but I was expected to work for free.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GPL is a response to the copyright law, which was created for the big corporations to extract rent from ordinary people. It's copyright law which should go away.
Copyright law is hundreds of years old and originally was intended to prevent owner-operators of mechanical printing presses from printing and selling copies of some author's books without paying them or getting permission.
We agree that that was its initial stated intention.
However, what we have seen in practice is that it has resulted in the owner-operators of those machines banding together to restrict access to the machines unless authors sign exploitative contracts assigning their rights to the operators (which they interpret as "getting permission").
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think they even see it as their responsibility, more, "If he wanted money, he should have charged for his software".
If he actually did charge money someone else would've written an implementation of sudo to solve their own needs and avoid the overhead of transacting with a random developer.
Reading the release history[1]. I'm kind of shocked that sudo gets active development and monthly releases. I would have thought that something this old and venerated would have been "done" long ago. 1: https://www.sudo.ws/releases/devel/
But of course, that's silly. Of every piece of software has to be written. I should probably throw the guy a few bucks, considering his code runs in basically every big script on the planet.
It's genuinely terrifying to think how much of the modern internet rests on the shoulders of a few people maintaining core utilities like sudo, curl, and openssl for decades. Todd is a legend.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A production environment should usually be setup up properly with explicit roles and normal access control. … and sudo is a common tool for doing that so you can do things like say members of this group can restart a specific service or trigger a task as a service user without otherwise giving them root. Yes, there are many other ways to accomplish that goal but it seems odd to criticize a tool being used for its o…
PSA for anyone reading this, you should probably use polkit instead of sudo if you just want to grant systemd-related permissions, like restarting a service, to an unprivileged user. It's roughly the same complexity (one drop-in file) to implement.