Post

I think it’s just horrible news that the far right is able to concentrate a lot of capital into building their own orgs so that they can bypass and effectively do a coup on institutions they dislike, not for technical reasons but because those institutions are too trans, woke, and brown.

This is why I'm less and less a fan of open source. Not like, the ideals are fine or whatever. But genuinely just having low skill loud internet chuds steal your stuff and turn it into profitable institutions that hate you seems kind of stupid?

tbf you still get to use it

this *is* whys strong FOSS is important tho. the GPL is incredibly important

EUPL-1.2 is nice because it's half an enforceable AGPL, but also interops with more licenses than AGPL can like BSD-3 clause.

oh fuck yeah a fellow EUPL shill? I also like it way better than the GPL, both the text of it and the ideals behind the license. The FSF is quite frankly deranged and have long mistaken the map of copyright for the territory of free expression through code

Also it has way more comprehensive protections than the AGPL on distribution, I thought? It's kind of like the SSPL but better and not killed by bad faith actors blatantly discriminating against it

Honestly half the reason I'm no longer on Guix is the FSF... literally they're worse than us, partially because of the BDFL-lite model (and shadow BDFL stallman saying really inaccurate stuff on mailing lists)

Yeahhhh the FSF sucks and pretty much always has IMO they maybe could've, with work, pulled outta the abyss after ditching Stallman, but then they brought him back ffs. Also their FAQ and stance on linking is fucking deranged, they absolutely fucking have interoperability and free software.

Tech was always political and social and free software always should've fought on those forums and under those broader ideals but instead they harshly rejected it, narrowed it to "pure" technical code, shut out allies, formed no solidarity with non software but ostensibly shared ideal groups, etc

Also blatant contradictions, like that they consider proprietary kernel modules inherently GPL violating but nobody is gunning to stop it, or the fact the linux kernel literally isn't GPL licensed. it has no license and is in clear violation if you believe FSF logic

The reason is simple, EXPORT_SYMBOL(_GPL). The GPL and FSF argue explicit linking exceptions are required, but the kernel GPL license has only the userspace syscall exception. No license agreement anyone has agreed to has said some symbols are GPL exempt, and it was added post hoc.

And this is a real debate among kernel developers, there isn't unified (dis)agreement with the FSF stance, just on simply ignoring the legal issue and maybe grumbling on the mailing list. So even if they could contact everyone they'd never get approval to add the exception.

There are even LWN articles that talk about this issue! Its a miracle everybody decided it's in their best interest to ignore it

For example "In general, the kernel community has long worked to maintain a vague and scary ambiguity around the legal status of proprietary modules while being unwilling to attempt to ban such modules outright." lwn.net/Articles/603...

the way I see it, linking should've been FOSS's answer to EEE. Making Free versions of things that can embrace and extend existing proprietary things; What valve is doing with wine and proton are kind of the success story here, but that imagine a world where Free Software had done that?

And making it a readily apparent social/cultural issue, make people wonder "why is this plugin the only proprietary thing on my computer? why dont you, <plugin company>, make it Free? Why, <firmware maker>, can't I audit your code for security, when I can everything else?"

but instead they said "better to have nothing at all than it is to have even a speck of unholy taint, ahem i mean proprietary software. except firmware blobs, which by holy decree don't count; Just take your existing closed code and put it in firmware where its even harder to change? We approve!"

also the FSF's linking stance seems plainly incompatible with... the entire EU? Theres pretty robust protections for interoperability, the ones the EUPL relies on, basically aiui its fair use for any reading americans.

so locking US Free Software out of.. the entire EU seems a bad thing to want, and the alternative would be plainly campaigning to strengthen copyright and weaken interoperability protections to allow their interpretation, which would be plainly evil(because the FSF is evil and wants evil things..)

OKAY THE RANT DIDNT STOP LOL

hey excuse you, it stopped 30 minutes ago!

PART 2???