If an open source app developer says their app is only officially available and supported from one specific build, but you would like to distribute it somewhere else, so the app author has added an in-app note when running from an unsupported package saying it's not supported, do you still package it, and how?
@BrodieOnLinux@fuchsiii OFC not - and not because they don't want to [tho I'd also nope ransomware groups' demands] but also because #nvidia can't legally do that in many cases, as they too are #licensees of #patents and are bound to #NDA's.
So #GPLv3 and #AGPLv3 are impossible to comply with and even #GPLv2 would be hard to.
Kinda like the shitshow #BusyBox did (gojng GPLv3 and sueing the crap out of license violators), so @landley left that project and started #toybox from the ground up.
sboms are all the rage now, and I’ve been thinking of them like the ingredients on packaged food. Similar to how some foods have “no MSG” or “sugar free”, I wonder how long it will be before we see software with “No Apache Struts” or “Written with only memory-safe languages”…
Sometimes the obvious is hard to find. I struggled a bit to find a good and simple font manager/viewer for GNU/#Linux (#xfce / #gnome / #gtk). Gnome Font Viewer was ... a bit basic, to say the least.
This (right side) is the #GUI of "μBlogger", a small experimental Twitter/Identi.ca/StatusNet #microblogging client built on #Java Swing (multiplatform #desktop) that I created in 2009. Later that year, I started a full-time job and eventually forgot all about it. 14 years later, I stumbled upon the project page https://launchpad.net/ublogger
The entire city of #Yellowknife is being evacuated. This is unprecedented and terrifying.
And thousands of citizens aren’t aware because Meta continues to block news in the country.
This is what happens when citizens are convinced to use an American multinational corporation as their community’s primary communications channel — a corporation that couldn’t give two shits about anything except its “fiduciary duty” to shareholders.
It's way more complex but it allows for some consistent yet realistic approaches.
I.e. one can acknowledge that #grsecurity and #RedHat showed the need for stronger #Copyleft whilst also noting that neither #GPLv3 nor #AGPLv3 nor #SSPL doesn't adress that problem and instead demand illegal actions to comply [i.e. surrendering all patents] which ignore the reality of #tech.
I love when a company who built their whole business on top of open source developed by others (Linux, Ruby, Go, etc) decry "vendors who take advantage of pure OSS models, and the community work on OSS projects, for their own commercial goals" switch to a proprietary license rather than a copyleft that actually codifies the culture of reciprocal sharing.
#GPLv3 for example is full of ideological bs that is neither enforceable nor legal (i.e. surrendering all patents and licensing then for free) when even it doesn't account for #paywalling of #SourceCode access or restricting it to (paying) customers.
Were the #GPLv3 not ideological garbage but actually comitted to #FLOSS remaining #public, it would've chosen #PublicAccessibilit to code as priority over illegally demanding surrender of all #Patents and #IP.
Hier ist ein Totalausfall der Microsoft-Sicherheit beschrieben, ausgenutzt durch russische Hacker. Auch NGOs sollen angegriffen worden sein. Da könnte man ja eigentlich vorschlagen, die Datenkraken zu löschen und gut?
After 11 years and 15 days from 2012-07-12, I am proud to present the first real release of MoeNavigator - a web browser written from scratch in C++. Its engine (called MoeNavigatorEngine) is also written from scratch:
You’re interested in tech and you want a nice home (or just any home) and stability? Go work at Google, Facebook, or some other surveillance capitalist.
What’s that? You want to work on free and open source? Sure, go work at IBM or Oracle… Oh… you don’t mean enterprise software? Tech to protect human rights/democracy? Not for profit hippie-dippie crap for the common good?
Oh, then suffer.
I mean, is it any surprise things are as they are?
@fsf Where can I read about the legal licensing and copyleft issues surrounding generative AI algorithms like LLMs (Large Language Models) like Chat-GPT or Copilot, trained on GPL'd source code?
I wonder if there is a need for a new license that explicitly makes training generative AI on open source code requires the AI model to be open sourced?
Does the FSF have any written opinions or educational materials related to this topic of the relationship between copyleft and generative AI trained on copyleft source code?
I notice that copyright holders, like Sarah Silverman, Christopher Golden, and Richard Kadrey are suing Meta and OpenAI for copyright infringement, so I hope that copyleft will have its legal battles in a similar vein.
Also, I'm betting that existing GPLv3 licenses don't mention being used as training data in other algorithms. I imagine there could be stronger legal wording in future licenses that specifies consequences for using copyleft software as training data for closed source algorithms.
Defending the copyright system seems at the heart and core of the copyleft free software agenda, and currently Sarah Silverman et al seems to be leading the charge.
Are there software licenses out there that guarantee to the user the ability to receive updates and improvements to a piece of open source software?
I don't know of any license other than the GPL that provides this guarantee to the user.
I know that I'm more motivated to learn a new tool when it is protected by the GPL because of this guarantee that future versions will also be open source.
When I license my own software, I choose the Affero GPLv3 because it provides this extra guarantee to the users, even if the software serving the user is on a webserver.
Section 5, "Conveying Modified Source Versions", of the Affero GPLv3 sounds very related to this protection.
It sounds to me that anyone is free to distribute modified versions of the software, but to do so, they must also release the source code for the modified version they release, also under the same license.
As much as I do want to see #BigTech to be forced out of #FLOSS or at the very least be forced to pay maintainers appropriately, we all know this ain't happen unless they're forced to do so as "lesser evil"...
#IBM acquiring #RedHat and killing off #RHEL-compatible Distros with #grsecurity-Style Assholeism is a prime sample.
So OFC you can use said license - just as I use #GPLv3 to commit #AssetDenial on my own projects...