391–400 of 551 posts
"On Oct 26, we sent a formal letter to Truth Social’s chief legal officer, requesting the source code to be made publicly available in compliance with the license. According to AGPLv3, after being notified by the copyright holder, Truth Social has 30 days to comply or the license may be permanently revoked."
Kinda off and I have no horses in the race but how come Mastodon has so many gambling sites and casinos as sponsors? Never knew that, feels a bit odd. Also personally not a big fan of this... https://joinmastodon.org/sponsors
AGPL can also not be "permanently revoked". It's not individually licensed to each user like proprietary software often is, it's one license addressed to anyone. Furthermore the AGPL is explicitly irrevocable. They can change the license to a proprietary one but this does not affect existing copies under AGPL.
Last I'd like to touch on "antithetical values". If Mastodon were to discriminate against persons, groups or fields of endeavor in their license they would no longer meet the definition of open source, but rather become a source available proprietary product.
Do we really have to give this guy the #1 Hacker News story? He was fading into the background so nicely.
You mean the person who was the sitting president of the united states, who got deplatformed in unison by big tech social media, and is now fighting against censorship by using tech? Yeah, that is not relevant at all to hackernews /s
What did he do? What could he possibly have done, to get that to happen? It's like I wasn't sitting a mile from the capitol watching the WTOP national mall guy hiding behind a banister while the mob from his rally battered down the doors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People were able to access the service and create accounts. Those people are entitled to the sources. This would immediately go away if they just posted a tarball of the almost certainly unmodified sources. I guess nobody running this understands what's going on?
> This would immediately go away if they just posted a tarball of the almost certainly unmodified sources. No it wouldn't. NOTHING short of shutting down would ever satisfy the people going after Trump.
This is incorrect. Currently Truth is still internal software not available to the public, AGPL requires distribution of source code alongside the distribution of the program or service. Because Truth is only made available internally, the modified source code only has to be made available to their own company. This would change once the service does go public. AGPL can also not be "permanently revoked". It's not ind…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Expecting Donald Trump to observe the rules and norms that are not strictly enforced is extremely naive. He thinks only suckers do that. What does he do? He ignores all of that and gets ahead. That's why I call people like him "termites of civilization". They slowly eat at the foundation, until the society itself collapses. We are already seeing it. The pandemic of selfishness and shamelessness, and overwhelming rude…
So weird that everything started collapsing exactly on January 20th, 2017. The people who have been in power for 40 years are definitely NOT the problem. It was just that last guy.
As an aside, it it really strange to see people falling in front of Trump to protect him on HN, a place with seemingly smart people. A man with zero principles, no moral compass, and fewer redeeming qualities than Caligula.
And all of this in a thread that is wondering - why doesn't Donald Trump care about our rules?
Off to shout obscenities at a school board meeting, toodles!
This is incorrect. Currently Truth is still internal software not available to the public, AGPL requires distribution of source code alongside the distribution of the program or service. Because Truth is only made available internally, the modified source code only has to be made available to their own company. This would change once the service does go public. AGPL can also not be "permanently revoked". It's not ind…
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html
Revoke may not be the legally correct word to use, but it's an informal blog post and not a legal document, and what they intended to say is clear enough.
I think that your understanding of how the licensure works is a bit off. Open source software is still individually licensed to everyone. The copyright holder retains copyright, and can terminate an individual's rights under the license as long as the license includes a termination clause. Which the AGPL does.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That trademark stuff is an excuse for wealthy litigious companies, it isn't actually how the law works and we should stop giving them a pass. Disney, Nintendo and similar outfits can afford to go after people who weren't causing them any harm and so they do.
> it isn't actually how the law works and we should stop giving them a pass. That’s not accurate. Trademark law does require active policing and enforcement, and failure to enforce a trademark can be grounds for losing it. Yes, big corps probably are more aggressive than the law requires, but it’s a pretty fuzzy, not super well defined, line.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Restricting software use to only people approved by the creators is a terrible idea. Everyone is free to use the software. If a project is found to be in violation of the Code of Conduct (e.g. discriminating against marginalized communities, manipulating public opinion, automating weapons) than the community developing the software takes steps to remedy the problem with the reported violator, or the project falls o…
> discriminating against marginalized communities If mastodon had this in the code of conduct they’d not be able to use their own software haha. They banned Gab and arguably Trump has a marginalized base and as far as I’m aware never advocated for violence (if you believe the contrary, note that trump could have been arrested but hasn’t)