Open Source Mythology
lgug2z.com
Open Source Mythology
1–10 of 20 posts
Re: Open Source Mythology
#2Okay
Re: Open Source Mythology
#3The topic a not-entirely-open-source license the author has apparently created, and is defending.
As an illustration: the author uses a Mao Zedong quotation as one of his points.
Re: Open Source Mythology
#4Important note that this is window manager for _Windows_.
The venn diagram for "people who give a shit about FOSS licences" and "people who daily drive Windows" is nearly two circles.
Re: Open Source Mythology
#5The topic a not-entirely-open-source license the author has apparently created, and is defending. As an illustration: the author uses a Mao Zedong quotation as one of his points.
thank you for pointing this out! i probably would not have bothered to click through if i hadn't seen this comment, and i would have missed a well-articulated stance on an issue i think about every time i pick a license: whether or not freely sharing my work will have a net positive effect on the world.
on contradiction is an apt choice of essay to look to here.
i wasn't going to speak on twenty enemies because i haven't read it before, but after reading five pages or so i went back to a section that had stuck with me only to discover it was the same one the author had pulled as the first quotation. not exactly where i would have expected to stumble across this, but here we are. again, thank for you calling out that this was more than the milquetoast drivel i had assumed it to be from an uncharitable reading of the title alone.
Re: Open Source Mythology
#6The topic a not-entirely-open-source license the author has apparently created, and is defending. As an illustration: the author uses a Mao Zedong quotation as one of his points.
thank you for pointing this out! i probably would not have bothered to click through if i hadn't seen this comment, and i would have missed a well-articulated stance on an issue i think about every time i pick a license: whether or not freely sharing my work will have a net positive effect on the world. on contradiction is an apt choice of essay to look to here. i wasn't going to speak on twenty enemies because i hav…
Likewise - at first I was prepared for this to be another weird permutation of MIT/BSD or something but once I got further into the article I understood the author's point (and agreed!) about claiming (at least a symbolic) right of refusal to allow one's work to be used for ill.
I don't know how enforceable that becomes, and I know that people the author refers to as dogmatists may be quick to point out the flaws (on some level it reminds me of pharmacists who refuse to dispense medications on personal grounds - eg, contraceptives or diabetic supplies to people they suspect of drug use).
But I think the conversation is valuable - there is a moral/ethical dilemma for many of us who truly love computing, when faced with a job market that consists largely of For-Profit Corporations And Governments Doing Bad Things (obviously this is personal and relative).
Re: Open Source Mythology
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
thank you for pointing this out! i probably would not have bothered to click through if i hadn't seen this comment, and i would have missed a well-articulated stance on an issue i think about every time i pick a license: whether or not freely sharing my work will have a net positive effect on the world. on contradiction is an apt choice of essay to look to here. i wasn't going to speak on twenty enemies because i hav…
Likewise - at first I was prepared for this to be another weird permutation of MIT/BSD or something but once I got further into the article I understood the author's point (and agreed!) about claiming (at least a symbolic) right of refusal to allow one's work to be used for ill. I don't know how enforceable that becomes, and I know that people the author refers to as dogmatists may be quick to point out the flaws (on…
Mr Crockford has trolled the entire industry with the JSON license: https://www.json.org/license.html It states that it can be used for good, but not for evil.
The problem is, of course, in the lack of an established, clear-cut, whole-society consensus on what is good and what is evil, and also in the inability of humans to formally define even their own criteria for that. As with porn, "I can recognize it when I see it" is a bit shaky ground for legal matters.
Speaking of the For-Profit Corporations, the profit is what pays the wages of those they employ, so, unless you agree to do programming (or any professional activity) entirely as a pastime,..
Re: Open Source Mythology
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
Likewise - at first I was prepared for this to be another weird permutation of MIT/BSD or something but once I got further into the article I understood the author's point (and agreed!) about claiming (at least a symbolic) right of refusal to allow one's work to be used for ill. I don't know how enforceable that becomes, and I know that people the author refers to as dogmatists may be quick to point out the flaws (on…
Mr Crockford has trolled the entire industry with the JSON license: https://www.json.org/license.html It states that it can be used for good, but not for evil. The problem is, of course, in the lack of an established, clear-cut, whole-society consensus on what is good and what is evil, and also in the inability of humans to formally define even their own criteria for that. As with porn, "I can recognize it when I see…
The revenue is what pays the wages. Wages are a business expense, not an optional benefit. I don’t like this response. It comes across as very “but you use a cell phone” to me. Yes, the world we live in is fueled by profit. It’s not a good thing to me.
Re: Open Source Mythology
#9I've skimmed the post, and I've clicked through to the license[0], but I'm not clear on what is meant by "firewall license"?
Is it just that the license doesn't allow use by corporations, and that's why they say the target audience is:
> Those who reject genocide-friendly software licensing
Can someone help me grok it a little better?
Re: Open Source Mythology
#10Important note that this is window manager for _Windows_. The venn diagram for "people who give a shit about FOSS licences" and "people who daily drive Windows" is nearly two circles.
I think “people who daily drive Windows” is an invalid set for comparison here.
I suspect there is a lot more overlap if you instead consider “people who give a shit about FOSS licences” in relation to “people who know what a tiling window manager is and want to use one, and daily drive Windows”.