Post A3Td2ca18Ff8rIAfmC by waltercool@pl.slash.cl
(DIR) More posts by waltercool@pl.slash.cl
(DIR) Post #A3TElFIVgtpuSr5B2m by captain@pirateradio.social
2021-01-21T18:31:17.319845Z
2 likes, 0 repeats
red-pill me on open source licensing
(DIR) Post #A3TFR7IboqPfov5uc4 by anokasion@cawfee.club
2021-01-21T18:38:51.307268Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@captain basically both licenses do not restrict to distribute your codeGPLversionX = I can fork as I like as long I mention you and modify the code MITversionX = I can as I like as long as I get permission and mention you
(DIR) Post #A3THA2Irh4RNfpHLvM by alex@gleasonator.com
2021-01-21T18:58:10.012384Z
10 likes, 6 repeats
@captain To understand open source licensing we first have to go back to the advent of the printing press. It was the 1700’s in England. Printed books created massive social change, and confusion, much like the internet is doing today.A printing press was large an expensive, and inaccessible to the average person. This made it easy for England to control publishers. England first passed laws whitelisting acceptable works (aka censorship) and this later evolved into copyright law.The defense of copyright law has always been about social good. It prohibits publishers from manufacturing books without the permission of the author. As a result, authors had an incentive to write more books, meaning the public got to read more books, and it DID create a social good. In the 1700s.Fast forward to the 21st century and anyone can become a publisher for free on the internet. The printing press has been diminished to LCD screens and inkjet printers. Now the social good argument for copyright is certainly in the other direction. We can either educate the world for free or constrain ourselves due to archaic printing press regulations designed by a country we revolted against 245 years ago.How this affects code is strange, but apparently code is considered a creative work of authorship like writing a book, and thus affected by copyright. The idea of applying this 300 year old law to CODE is even more absurd. But we do.Open source licenses are just a rejection of that idea, for so many reasons. I’d say the “copyleft” licenses are the definitive ones, which Richard Stallman calls a “hack” on copyright law. If copyright law must exist, we can use a copyleft license to work within copyright to essentially neutralize it. Copyleft doesn’t just let anyone reuse a work, but it prohibits them from applying draconian copyright laws to the work ever again. Thus, the code is set free.
(DIR) Post #A3THPVkgUDVxLofbvc by captain@pirateradio.social
2021-01-21T19:00:58.349023Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@alex I’ll dig into it. Are there any major projects that have a ‘Copyleft’ license?
(DIR) Post #A3THYVAq0OOWAEBrWa by alex@gleasonator.com
2021-01-21T19:02:35.371441Z
2 likes, 1 repeats
@captain The one you’re posting from. 😛 Also, Linux.
(DIR) Post #A3TIt4YwEyIDfLptHk by curtis@social.teci.world
2021-01-21T19:17:31.592305Z
2 likes, 0 repeats
@alex @captain A competition of ideas analysis would indicate that some choose to sometimes freely share the product of their own labor, while others choose to see what the market will bear for their work product. These choices are based on their individual motivations to see the results of what they produce.When systems are established by groups of people, those systems can become complex enough to try to automatically help protect work products, unless people specifically decline those protections. One argument for automatic protections of work product is that the overall success of a society somewhat depends on a producer being comfortable enough to apply capital toward creation of a certain work product.The most fragile point in the cycle from idea to product is the decision to take that first step. One can argue that a society benefits when more "first steps" are taken than less. In that way, copyrights are one form of incentive to take that first step.
(DIR) Post #A3TaEL5bggCAE1qJlY by PauITown@poa.st
2021-01-21T22:31:51.648800Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@alex How do artist make money if no copyright?
(DIR) Post #A3TbkqWSSHzMvySzYG by alex@gleasonator.com
2021-01-21T22:48:55.893660Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@PauITown The exact same way they currently do.
(DIR) Post #A3TbxkXrzQSqA1HPou by PauITown@poa.st
2021-01-21T22:51:16.368676Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@alex If I make & sell program what stop people from reproducing it?
(DIR) Post #A3Tc4ZVhPr4DxmW9fE by alex@gleasonator.com
2021-01-21T22:52:29.862940Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@PauITown
(DIR) Post #A3TcBO06bg8OIHzOe8 by feld@bikeshed.party
2021-01-21T22:53:43.861260Z
4 likes, 4 repeats
@alex @PauITown
(DIR) Post #A3TcO3alnStalKBGHQ by feld@bikeshed.party
2021-01-21T22:56:01.024990Z
3 likes, 3 repeats
@alex @PauITown
(DIR) Post #A3TcQCmOboDnptdvMm by PauITown@poa.st
2021-01-21T22:56:24.971986Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@alex If plankton takes the krabby patty secret formula, how is the greedy Mr.Krabs supposed to stay in business?
(DIR) Post #A3TcVkIrOczjFuTC5Y by alex@gleasonator.com
2021-01-21T22:57:24.526332Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@feld @PauITown Indoctrination. But it’s also funny.
(DIR) Post #A3TcbINi7bH0OZNvPM by feld@bikeshed.party
2021-01-21T22:58:24.553726Z
3 likes, 1 repeats
@PauITown @alex here's the sequel
(DIR) Post #A3Td0ICdvFP3567yLo by Moon@shitposter.club
2021-01-21T23:02:55.849169Z
10 likes, 3 repeats
@feld @PauITown @alex it sucks how we never stopped pirating and now years later there are no games anymore
(DIR) Post #A3Td2ca18Ff8rIAfmC by waltercool@pl.slash.cl
2021-01-21T23:03:20.692768Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@alex @PauITown Still, I’m at same point.I do agree copying physical items is not theft. after all, as long people can do it with your own materials and bare hands, it’s OK. No one can restrict something made with your own effort.Now, copying digital items, it’s more complicated. I do buy games on GOG because it gives you freedom, not because I want to “share” the software with others… understanding developers work for money/food, not for free.Trying to make copying is not theft, basically promotes more DRM in software, which is awful in terms of freedom.
(DIR) Post #A3TdN0EQu9Ra0NnHcW by mangeurdenuage@shitposter.club
2021-01-21T23:07:02.486308Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@captain https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html
(DIR) Post #A3TdUrHS4ME2Ylx4RE by feld@bikeshed.party
2021-01-21T23:08:27.575519Z
2 likes, 1 repeats
@Moon @PauITown @alex what actually sucks is they took away servers and modding tools so we could build awesome shit againnow they just sell garbage DLC nobody needs
(DIR) Post #A3TdbLdg6srkS7RUtU by captain@pirateradio.social
2021-01-21T23:09:37.390211Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mangeurdenuage I’ve always said open source. Is ‘free open source’ a good alternative (yes I am aware of FOSS as an acronym)
(DIR) Post #A3Tdn6K2snJwQKrc0G by mangeurdenuage@shitposter.club
2021-01-21T23:11:45.497189Z
3 likes, 0 repeats
@anokasion @captain >basically both licenses do not restrict to distribute your codeThat is incorrect.MIT: You just have to mention the license that's all you have to do, you can fork/copy the source code but when you share a binary you have no obligation to share the source code if someone who has the binary asks you.GPLv2: You have to mention the license, you can do what you want with it except of forbidding people to not have the source code if they ask for it.GPLv3: this version basically adds an ant-DRM clause, you cannot block people with DRMs.
(DIR) Post #A3Tdy2SJbCn7cJwn1U by PauITown@poa.st
2021-01-21T23:13:43.972729Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@waltercool I refunded Cyberpunk2077 after playing it for 80hrs and beating it.(It was jank, and they misrepresented it so whatever)
(DIR) Post #A3TemfLRHhQihzs7bk by waltercool@pl.slash.cl
2021-01-21T23:22:52.383322Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@PauITown Well, that’s exactly my point.So you,Gave them money for a product who produce enjoymentEnjoyed for 80 hoursTook back the money from themIf we consider the product have hundred of people effort inside it, you basically abused of their work. Otherwise you wouldn’t use it more than 1 hr.
(DIR) Post #A3TjmOqb7ZRNJV8eie by anokasion@cawfee.club
2021-01-22T00:18:51.653544Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@mangeurdenuage @captain this is kinda what I said but longer, and yes bot licenses tries to not restrict the sharing of code
(DIR) Post #A3UCmqgMWqykJRuwOu by lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
2021-01-22T05:43:52.341282Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@feld @alex @PauITown @Moon Modding doesn't really need tools, I'm the kind of person that ended up binary-editing firefox in 2012~2013 because compiling it was too much of a mess and none of what I wanted to do was possible with extensions. (And there wasn't a lot of releases back then)And there is still a lot of games that require binary-editing to work, a recent example I had is Life is Strange for Windows: https://www.gog.com/forum/life_is_strange_series/wont_launch_possible_fix/page1That said I wish they would distribute at least specs for the client-server protocols, this way you wouldn't have to rely on shady code for private servers (Minecraft is in the rare exceptions where the server code was/is freeware).
(DIR) Post #A3YSL4k3Qm7RYZhmQS by Libertarians_AMA@liberdon.com
2021-01-24T06:57:00Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@alex @PauITown I'm new here.. how do I download this?
(DIR) Post #A3YSh4urSnEET5Ffdo by PauITown@poa.st
2021-01-24T07:01:02.088711Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Alt + F4@Libertarians_AMA
(DIR) Post #A3YV4mwc8K9baWVNp2 by anonymoose@fedi.club
2021-01-24T07:27:43.587196Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@waltercool @PauITown it's way simpler than your making it. Centuries of indoctrination have made people assume that 'ideas can be owned' is the null hypothesis, but let's just think about our freshman econ classes: Ideas simply not excludable, and as such, they can neither be a private or club good. That is to say, ideas are not in the set of things that *can* be owned. This isn't some esoteric point of anarco-capitalists philosophy, it's literally econ 101 level analysis here. And as they are also non-rivalrous, ideas are a 'pure public good', meaning that if anything, the government should be subsidizing the distribution of creative works, rather than penalizing it.
(DIR) Post #A3YVPr6Ls9wgYv6bJo by anonymoose@fedi.club
2021-01-24T07:31:32.090070Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Libertarians_AMA @alex @PauITown download the thread? I would suggest a screenshot. Other than copying the raw html I'm not aware of another way to preserve a thread.
(DIR) Post #A3cHwKgsm52Ss8clZw by snowkeld@liberdon.com
2021-01-26T02:53:54Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@captain MIT is anarchy. Just mention the dev and do whatever you want. New derivative works can be licensed any way the author wants.GLP is open by force. Derivative works must be open as well. Gpl can sometimes hinder a project because some developers want to license their work but will still contribute, especially with bug reports and donation to the top level dev under MIT. On the other hand gnu gpl systems like Debian usually can't include anything that's MIT..
(DIR) Post #A3cHwPUeuxERlfwZii by snowkeld@liberdon.com
2021-01-26T02:57:33Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@captain both are considered official legal ways to establish a copyleft license and was the reason for both to come about. I personally favor MIT because I don't think licencing should exist as a government rule and gpl uses that same rule to force it to be open to the public. I'm ok with private code, not force, if that makes any sense.
(DIR) Post #A3cHyVmYVWn7qpJhfE by captain@pirateradio.social
2021-01-26T03:19:49.389330Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@snowkeld this is the breakdown I really needed, thank you