> This is my TempleOS.
This is easily one of my favorite descriptive details I've ever seen in a README.
MIRA – An open-source persistent AI entity with memory
31–40 of 57 posts
Re: MIRA – An open-source persistent AI entity with memory
#32Title says "open source", but the Business Source License (BSL) is not an Open Source Initiative (OSI) approved open-source license.
I see this more and more used. It seems companies want to fake stuff now, aka claiming to be open source when they are not. DHH also claims he is super open source when in reality he already soul-sent to the big tech bros: https://world.hey.com/dhh/the-o-saasy-license-336c5c8f We also had this recently with arduino. I don't understand why companies try to get that way. To me it is not an open source licence - it is a…
> already soul-sent to the big tech bros
I'm not seeing the justification for this comment. If anything that license, like the BSL, is aimed at keeping the small guy who worked on X in business so they can profit from their work (always need to put food on the table) while also sharing its innards with the world.
Re: MIRA – An open-source persistent AI entity with memory
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see this more and more used. It seems companies want to fake stuff now, aka claiming to be open source when they are not. DHH also claims he is super open source when in reality he already soul-sent to the big tech bros: https://world.hey.com/dhh/the-o-saasy-license-336c5c8f We also had this recently with arduino. I don't understand why companies try to get that way. To me it is not an open source licence - it is a…
(As I said above I changed to an AGPL earlier today but I'll speak to my BSL logic) I liked BSL because the code ~was~ proprietary for a time so someone couldn't duplicate my software I've worked so hard on, paywall it, and put me out of business. I'm a one-man development operation and a strong gust of wind could blow me over. I liked BSL because it naturally decayed into a permissive open source license automatical…
Totally fair - but just call it Source Available then.
Open Source has a specific definition and this license does not conform to that definition.
Stating it is open source creates a bait and switch effect with people who understand this definition, get excited, then realize this project is not actually open source.
Re: MIRA – An open-source persistent AI entity with memory
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see this more and more used. It seems companies want to fake stuff now, aka claiming to be open source when they are not. DHH also claims he is super open source when in reality he already soul-sent to the big tech bros: https://world.hey.com/dhh/the-o-saasy-license-336c5c8f We also had this recently with arduino. I don't understand why companies try to get that way. To me it is not an open source licence - it is a…
> already soul-sent to the big tech bros I'm not seeing the justification for this comment. If anything that license, like the BSL, is aimed at keeping the small guy who worked on X in business so they can profit from their work (always need to put food on the table) while also sharing its innards with the world.
Same.
If you’re able to self host and run the tool for any use, it’s effectively a free, extensible, modifiable software solution.
Copyleft licenses are as restrictive as the license DHH put out with Fizzy. I’m an Apache 2.0 or MIT licensing OSS advocate myself, but it’s difficult to argue that it’s worse or equal to a fully closed SaaS solution.
It’s not even remotely close to one of these bullshit “ee” OSS licenses
Re: MIRA – An open-source persistent AI entity with memory
#35> This is my TempleOS. This is easily one of my favorite descriptive details I've ever seen in a README.
:D I’d also like to thank David Hahn for obsessively (and arguably compulsively) learning about a topic way out of his depth and then manifesting it till the cops took him away.
Re: MIRA – An open-source persistent AI entity with memory
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
(As I said above I changed to an AGPL earlier today but I'll speak to my BSL logic) I liked BSL because the code ~was~ proprietary for a time so someone couldn't duplicate my software I've worked so hard on, paywall it, and put me out of business. I'm a one-man development operation and a strong gust of wind could blow me over. I liked BSL because it naturally decayed into a permissive open source license automatical…
Totally fair - but just call it Source Available then. Open Source has a specific definition and this license does not conform to that definition. Stating it is open source creates a bait and switch effect with people who understand this definition, get excited, then realize this project is not actually open source.
That’s fair. It’s OSI now but I get what you’re saying broadly.
Re: MIRA – An open-source persistent AI entity with memory
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
(As I said above I changed to an AGPL earlier today but I'll speak to my BSL logic) I liked BSL because the code ~was~ proprietary for a time so someone couldn't duplicate my software I've worked so hard on, paywall it, and put me out of business. I'm a one-man development operation and a strong gust of wind could blow me over. I liked BSL because it naturally decayed into a permissive open source license automatical…
Totally fair - but just call it Source Available then. Open Source has a specific definition and this license does not conform to that definition. Stating it is open source creates a bait and switch effect with people who understand this definition, get excited, then realize this project is not actually open source.
"Open Source has a specific definition and this license does not conform to that definition."
To be fair, this wouldn't be an issue if Open Source stuck with "Debian Free Software". If you really want to call it a bait and switch, open source did it first.
Re: MIRA – An open-source persistent AI entity with memory
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
The phrase was first applied to software by the drafters of the Open Source Definition.
Be that as it may, it's a generic phrase, as evinced by its prior usage in other fields like intelligence and journalism. Lacking a trademark, OSI has zero authority to word-police everyone else. No amount of plugging their ears and chanting lalalala will change the fact that OSI does not own exclusive rights to the phrase "open source." Not with respect to software, not with respect to anything else. The author of t…
"Steal" and "child" likewise lack any trademark protection.
So, suppose I accuse you of stealing from children, then when you protest, I reply that the meaning I give those 2 words might not be the meaning most people have, but that is fine because no one owns the exclusive rights to those 2 words.
Re: MIRA – An open-source persistent AI entity with memory
#39I'm curious why some features are disabled if you're using local models. Sorry if this is a dumb question.
Re: MIRA – An open-source persistent AI entity with memory
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've used the term for 25+ years to describe my own source-included free software projects, and I'll thank you (and OSI) for not policing my language. No trademark? No standing. Choose other crusades.
Overreaction much? Nobody is policing. Your failure to recognize the meaning of a word - like any other - is just going to harm you due to your own ignorance of its ramifications.
(Shrug) As you will note at the top of the thread, williamstein is policing. All I'm doing is pointing out that the policeman has no badge, no gun, and no uniform, and that their cruiser looks suspiciously like a '92 Crown Victoria with black and white spray paint and a spotlight from Cabela's.