|
wow really interesting. gas
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2020 10:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 03:38 |
|
|
Progressive JPEG posted:hippocratic license now has a v2.1 and has moved quite a bit from its “mit plus a clause or two” origins You think anyone would commercially use that, when it reduces their right to force you into regular corporate arbitration?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2020 14:35
|
|
|
if code cant be used for human rights violations theres no place in the market for it. nice try serial "entrepreneurs"
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2020 15:31
|
|
|
ok stallman
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2020 20:22
|
|
|
Captain Foo posted:You think anyone would commercially use that, when it reduces their right to force you into regular corporate arbitration? to be clear i am still in favor of commercial poison pills if you want to use this hobby project commercially then sure, email me and lets figure out a price
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2020 01:27
|
|
|
Progressive JPEG posted:to be clear i am still in favor of commercial poison pills and I'm still in favor of revocable licenses where if you suddenly turn into a shithead then i get to take my ball and go home.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2020 01:32
|
|
|
rotor posted:and I'm still in favor of revocable licenses where if you suddenly turn into a shithead then i get to take my ball and go home. why? you don’t want the competition?
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 08:55
|
|
|
fart simpson posted:why? you don’t want the competition? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 17:50
|
|
|
Is the difference that 'ol Werner had in-demand and transferable skills?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2020 02:57
|
|
|
the author of a software law blog that i've been following announced a couple template licenses:quote:Normally Open says “Everything not prohibited is permitted.” You get to fill in what’s prohibited. obv more interested in the Normally Closed one
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 20:27
|
|
|
mozilla is one of the few places that i think of as actually doing good work so it's a shame that they're apparently unraveling
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2020 21:13
|
|
|
mozilla and the rest of netscape's offspring all deserve to die for loving up the web with javascript
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2020 22:18
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:mozilla and the rest of netscape's offspring all deserve to die for loving up the web with javascript counterpoint: competing scripting languages of the time had read-write access to the users' hard drive
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2020 22:48
|
|
|
yeah like say what you want about js but circa 2000 every other alternative was god-awful
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2020 23:46
|
|
|
"Let me die with the Phillistines!" *deletes left-pad.js* e: looks like i already made that joke but wth, software development is for paying rent not making the world better Gazpacho fucked around with this message at 01:35 on Aug 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2020 00:19
|
|
|
I remember in like 1999 there was a webpage that would eject cd drives on windows machines
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2020 02:14
|
|
|
qirex posted:I remember in like 1999 there was a webpage that would eject cd drives on windows machines in aol chat you could type a command that would make everyone's a drive look for a disk and prompt a message if one wasn't inserted. made a bonus head motor noise
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2020 02:35
|
|
|
and actually there was some something awful parody site thing that would eject the cd
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2020 02:35
|
|
|
akadajet posted:and actually there was some something awful parody site thing that would eject the cd if i had a dollar for every programmer in the early 00s who devised a zany use for eject i'd be marginally wealthier
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2020 02:37
|
|
|
Mozilla needs to survive and keep working on FF if only to enable some part of the god drat forsaken web endeavour not to be a through and through for-profit—led ad project for giant billionaire sacks of poo poo
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2020 02:41
|
|
|
MononcQc posted:Mozilla needs to survive and keep working on FF if only to enable some part of the god drat forsaken web endeavour not to be a through and through for-profit—led ad project for giant billionaire sacks of poo poo
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2020 02:56
|
|
|
qirex posted:counterpoint: competing scripting languages of the time had read-write access to the users' hard drive counterpoint: the web didnt need a scripting language
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2020 03:44
|
|
|
MononcQc posted:Mozilla needs to survive and keep working on FF if only to enable some part of the god drat forsaken web endeavour not to be a through and through for-profit—led ad project for giant billionaire sacks of poo poo apple already benevolently makes safari
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2020 08:58
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:counterpoint: the web didnt need a scripting language Yes but how else will graphic/web designers justify their existence if they can't make your branding statement fly out from your monitor as you scroll down the screen and reiterate your core values as catchy animated bullet points
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2020 16:17
|
|
|
“Ha, not-C, Schmazi" says Wernher von Braun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2020 16:23
|
|
|
NecroBob posted:Yes but how else will graphic/web designers justify their existence if they can't make your branding statement fly out from your monitor as you scroll down the screen and reiterate your core values as catchy animated bullet points love that people blame designers for this and not coked out marketing executives
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2020 17:44
|
|
|
qirex posted:love that people blame designers for this and not coked out marketing executives ¿Por qué no los dos?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2020 02:34
|
|
|
before the web designers were fine doing print media and just having nothing move or flash for no reasons, and being able to do poo poo like use any orientation for thing and place them however the gently caress they want
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2020 02:36
|
|
|
Progressive JPEG posted:the author of a software law blog that i've been following announced a couple template licenses partially a good post, partially time to bump this thread. software licensing may be a pretty small thing all things considered, but it is a clearly yospos place to start from. and the times of finding some ease in the vagaries of the term "open source" are long over.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2020 01:44
|
|
|
So this has been rolling around in my head for a while and I finally wrote it down https://docs.google.com/document/d/1h__zP17eMoSXntHq6Jo7nKxRB8DoCOcVZ794Qd4LEA4/edit Please read my manifesto about how Open Source is Bad, Actually, and How We Should Stop Letting Evil People Use Our Work
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2020 02:11
|
|
|
rotor posted:So this has been rolling around in my head for a while and I finally wrote it down i was gonna suggest guns, but your way is fine too
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2020 04:08
|
|
|
there are many paths to righteousness
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2020 04:36
|
|
|
The Mother Theresa of software, 
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2020 05:54
|
|
|
rotor posted:So this has been rolling around in my head for a while and I finally wrote it down by a truly bizarre coincidence just yesterday i read this 2019 essay and you should read it too, the author is thinking the same things as you but coming at it from a different angle https://don.goodman-wilson.com/posts/open-source-is-broken/
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2020 08:30
|
|
|
rotor posted:there are many paths to righteousness so you gonna pick one or what!
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2020 11:44
|
|
|
it is deeply troubling that in so far as protecting rights and fostering communities rather than straight up exploitative behaviour, Richard Stallman has done a better job through GPL than most of the people who followed. I also read the text Bob Howard linked. It makes good points about the bad incentives and maintenance of the status quo, and on the focus on users rather than authors. Bringing up the bits with OSI going "yeah you can't do poo poo about evil people", reducing the autonomy of maintainers, and so on. It doesn't seem to clash with Rotor's manifesto though, which tries to provide a means to that change. I.e. the use of a trust to manage license grants rather than just "go hog wild you beautiful OSS user" seems to be a complete attempt at changing the dynamics from one where the user is empowered to everything into one that brings back a better balance of author-to-user. It is true that the people who are not part of the agreement can still suffer from it -- people who get racially profiled by ML poo poo for example. The status quo entrusts the users of the library with the moral responsibility of not harming others. Rotor's manifesto expands this responsibility to the author and the users (both have to agree for the code to remain usable). Rotor's manifesto appears to be a net benefit from the moral perspective. The interesting bit I was playing with is flipping towards an utilitarian viewpoint: if such a trust was everywhere for all OSS, would we have had easy turnkey solutions such as nginx for web front-ends or redis for backends? Would this framework be possible to leverage as a way to keep others down if you disagree with them (i.e. deny code use to human rights activists and specifically create a trust for evil?) I guess the toy argument is moot for a few reasons:
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2020 14:35
|
|
|
ok, now that we've established that any use of open source is immoral, how do we punish people for perpetuating systems of inequality by using it? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2020 14:51
|
|
|
MrMoo posted:The Mother Theresa of software, in all honesty any project I’ve been involved with has purified the souls of its users through unnecessary suffering
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2020 15:14
|
|
|
the law blog that I keep repeatedly linking had a post about "cross-license collaboratives", an agreement between contributors for deciding how project is run:quote:Cross-license collaboratives start with a kind of contributor license agreement, but instead of giving special license powers to a single company or developer, contributors give special license powers to each other. Those special powers come with a catch: they can only be used on behalf of the project as a whole, supported by a vote of fellow contributors. the post mainly talks about this being a way to structure payments to project members and allow changing the user license over time, but it also hints at this being a way to block access entirely: quote:In some cases, collaboratives may choose not to apply any public license to their work at all. They may offer licenses only for sale, or give a license that only applies to contributors. The project then becomes a kind of club good, free for contributors but paid for anyone else. the author also set up a website with an example agreement
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2020 00:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 03:38 |
|
|
Shaggar posted:mozilla and the rest of netscape's offspring all deserve to die for loving up the web with javascript
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2020 01:44
|
|
