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

In place of a legal notice, here is a blessing

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 116 posts

Re: In place of a legal notice, here is a blessing

#31

Post by collegeburner »

Georgelemental wrote: post #14
themodelplumber wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no reference to any Code of Ethics in the linked space above, though. Contextually the blessing text is completely subjective. (PS Are you also saying they have objectively measured the existence of God, or the divinity of Christ...?)

I'm saying that Abrahamic faiths generally don't leave any room for "my truth" being different from "your truth." There is only one Truth with a capital T, because there is only one God with a capital G. So if two people differ on some point of doctrine or ethics, one of them must be Right and the other must be Wrong. Mere mortals might not be able to determine which is which with perfect accuracy, but the One True G…

There may be one perfect truth but humans can only try to achieve it and being imperfect, none of us will. So we may come to different approximations of one truth.

Re: In place of a legal notice, here is a blessing

#32

Post by FredPret »

throwaway984393 wrote: post #6
Georgelemental wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "The author's obvious preference for subjective ethics" I doubt this interpretation, given SQLite's Code of Ethics ( https://sqlite.org/codeofethics.html ). Abrahamic faiths and subjective ethics don't go well together; "I am the way, the truth, and the life" doesn't leave much room for alternatives.

What's funny is the principals of what modern progresive intellectuals find right or wrong were introduced by Abrahamic (specifically Christian) teachings. Before that, the whole framework of the poor or meek being something everyone should protect wasn't a common idea. Even devout Atheists are basically Christian philosophers with scientific faith replacing theistic faith.

Nietzsche wrote a fascinating book about this - The Genealogy of Morals.

If I remember correctly, he uses the ancient city of Rome as a symbol of the pre-Abrahamic, natural han ethic. Power is good, sex is good, wealth is good, strength is good, competence is good.

This contrasts with the Jerusalem ethic where an almighty god is worshipped, not perched on a mountain or a cloud, but while nailed to a cross. So now self-sacrifice is good, and the whole story revolves around the weak, the poor, the downtrodden.

We’re still in the Jerusalem phase, despite having replaced the church with the state. Perhaps one day, in a few millennia, the wheel will turn back around.

It’s a good book!

Re: In place of a legal notice, here is a blessing

#33

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

yongjik wrote: post #25
loeg wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And a lot of kids born before 9/11 don't remember it, and they're in the workforce now.

Recently saw a Reddit thread with "Were the twin towers famous before they fell?" Felt old.

No post body was provided.

Re: In place of a legal notice, here is a blessing

#34

Post by Zandikar »

yongjik wrote: post #25
loeg wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And a lot of kids born before 9/11 don't remember it, and they're in the workforce now.

Recently saw a Reddit thread with "Were the twin towers famous before they fell?" Felt old.

And just to follow up for anyone who may genuinely be wondering: Yes. Yes they were. Not quite as ubiquitous or well known as "9/11" is today, but they were up there with the statue of liberty as far as Icons of NYC and to a slightly lesser extent icons of the USA. They were, as they say, a big deal, even before they fell.

Re: In place of a legal notice, here is a blessing

#36

Post by gjs278 »

Zandikar wrote: post #34
yongjik wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recently saw a Reddit thread with "Were the twin towers famous before they fell?" Felt old.

And just to follow up for anyone who may genuinely be wondering: Yes. Yes they were. Not quite as ubiquitous or well known as "9/11" is today, but they were up there with the statue of liberty as far as Icons of NYC and to a slightly lesser extent icons of the USA. They were, as they say, a big deal, even before they fell.

No post body was provided.

Re: In place of a legal notice, here is a blessing

#37

Post by marcan_42 »

sb057 wrote: post #24
DylanSp wrote: post #9

Has anyone heard of any issues using SQLite in jurisdictions without a concept of the public domain? The copyright page [1] seems to imply that you'd need to buy a license from Hwaci. [1] https://www.sqlite.org/copyright.html

It remains an open legal question (at least in the United States) whether or not an author even can voluntarily release something into the public domain. Hwaci could theoretically decide that, actually, that they never really put SQLite in the public domain and in fact possess full copyright over it and would like not only current and future licensing fees, but also retroactive fees from everyone who's used it over t…

Even when the concept of "public domain" may not apply as such, one can create a license that effectively grants public domain rights. CC0 is an example of such a license. What SQLite is doing here is similar.

Jurisdictions may impose limits as to what rights can be waived via license, but those limits apply to all licenses. In other words, if a PD-style license is invalid and does not confer the right to use the software, allowing the author to sue you for using the software, then the same is true of all freeware, open source, and commercial licenses. Buying a license wouldn't magically grant you any additional rights just because you paid money.

The commercial license stuff is CYA for companies with legal departments that don't understand open source or think the words "public domain" are spooky. In practice, SQLite and anything under a similar license is basically "as free as the law lets us make it" - and if it turns out that's not very free, that means we have a bit problem with more popular licenses like BSD, MIT, and GPL.

In practice, AIUI, the finer points that are under debate depending on the jurisdiction are around things like retaining authorship and moral rights (i.e. being credited). I don't think the idea of being able to provide a piece of software for free with no restrictions on usage or modification is under any kind of serious question. And the idea of not requiring credit for derivative works is also universal in the entire copyright industry - when was the last time you saw a CD crediting the author of every single royalty-free sample used in its creation? So embedding SQLite into a piece of software is pretty uncontroversially fine.

Now if you took SQLite, changed all the licenses to say you wrote it, and tried to distribute it stand-alone like that, some jurisdictions may have a problem with that. That's where moral rights come in, and where "public domain" might not truly mean "public domain".

As long as you don't do that, you're fine.

Re: In place of a legal notice, here is a blessing

#38

Post by rvense »

throwaway984393 wrote: post #6
Georgelemental wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "The author's obvious preference for subjective ethics" I doubt this interpretation, given SQLite's Code of Ethics ( https://sqlite.org/codeofethics.html ). Abrahamic faiths and subjective ethics don't go well together; "I am the way, the truth, and the life" doesn't leave much room for alternatives.

What's funny is the principals of what modern progresive intellectuals find right or wrong were introduced by Abrahamic (specifically Christian) teachings. Before that, the whole framework of the poor or meek being something everyone should protect wasn't a common idea. Even devout Atheists are basically Christian philosophers with scientific faith replacing theistic faith.

It says somewhere that there is nothing new under the sun...

Christianity, including its ethics, obviously also had sources and influences. Both in its inception and as it has changed, fractured and adapted to its surroundings over time. And if you truly think that Jesus invented helping the poor and acting righteous, I can only recommend you read about religions. Both those that influenced Christianity and those that never came into contact with it.

Re: In place of a legal notice, here is a blessing

#39

Post by randerson »

collegeburner wrote: post #30
Georgelemental wrote: post #4

See also the Code of Ethics: https://sqlite.org/codeofethics.html

I can't respons to randerson's comment directly because it's dead, I'd recommend he look at Aquinas' just war theory and other Christian ideas on when war is ok. There are many problems with the military industrial complex we have but that does not mean we should have no defense. Guided missile destroyers fulfill a legitimate defense role and would be needed even if we were much less interventionist.

I didn't dispute whether it can be used for good, I'm glad we have these things and I'm also a huge fan of SQLite. But when your system shoots down an enemy (to you) aircraft, how do you reconcile that with:

"Do not murder." "Love your neighbor as yourself." "Honor all people." "Do not do to another what you would not have done to yourself." "Do not return evil for evil." "Love your enemies." the list goes on..

Re: In place of a legal notice, here is a blessing

#40

Post by marcan_42 »

throwaway984393 wrote: post #6
Georgelemental wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "The author's obvious preference for subjective ethics" I doubt this interpretation, given SQLite's Code of Ethics ( https://sqlite.org/codeofethics.html ). Abrahamic faiths and subjective ethics don't go well together; "I am the way, the truth, and the life" doesn't leave much room for alternatives.

What's funny is the principals of what modern progresive intellectuals find right or wrong were introduced by Abrahamic (specifically Christian) teachings. Before that, the whole framework of the poor or meek being something everyone should protect wasn't a common idea. Even devout Atheists are basically Christian philosophers with scientific faith replacing theistic faith.

faith /feɪθ/

1. complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

Science is not something you have faith in. The entire point of science is allowing your beliefs to change when presented with evidence. That's the exact opposite of "complete trust". If anything, the only thing you need to have faith in is in the validity of your own experience - and that's a philosophical dilemma, not a scientific one.

Doing science means knowing we're probably wrong and will learn something new tomorrow - but we're probably at least a little bit right and that will have made our lives better until now.

Post reply on HN