Veganism Social

4 posts3 participants0 posts today

Hacker NewsI wrote to the address in the GPLv2 license notice<a href="https://code.mendhak.com/gpl-v2-address-letter/" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://code.mendhak.com/gpl-v2-address-letter/</a><a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/HackerNews" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#HackerNews</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/GPLv2" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPLv2</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/OpenSource" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#OpenSource</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/SoftwareLicensing" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#SoftwareLicensing</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/HackerNews" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#HackerNews</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/TechCommunity" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#TechCommunity</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a>

Alfred M. Szmidt<a href="https://mastodon.social/@cferdinandi" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@cferdinandi</a> The Expat license allows for exactly the same things the GNU GPL does, which is what makes them compatible. E.g., a non-commercial software license would not be compatible with the <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/GNU" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GNU</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a> since it limits how you can use a program, something the GNU GPL does not.<a href="https://masto.hackers.town/@mav" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@mav</a>

Alfred M. Szmidt<a href="https://mastodon.social/@cferdinandi" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@cferdinandi</a> <a href="https://masto.hackers.town/@mav" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@mav</a> > As a result, GPL and MIT code are incompatible together.That is not correct. The <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/GNU" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GNU</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a> and “MIT” (Expat license) are compatible.<a href="https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#Expat" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#Expat</a>

mortWhat's everyone's view on the <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/EUPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#EUPL</a> compared to the <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a>? I read thru it and my impression is that the EUPL achieves most of the same things as the GPL but with much less convoluted language, and written by EU lawyers rather than <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/FOSS" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#FOSS</a> activists which instills confidence.This part feels a bit weird tho: "The Licensee must cause any Derivative Work to carry prominent notices stating that the Work has been modified and the date of modification." What's "prominent"? <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/law" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#law</a> <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/OpenSource" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#OpenSource</a> <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/programming" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#programming</a>

YogthosThe GPL isn't just a license, it's a chain of custody for freedom. Unlike permissive MIT/BSD, that let corporations privatize code into closed ecosystems, GPL's ‘copyleft’ binds derivatives to openness, ensuring every user inherits the right to study, modify, and share.Permissive licenses enable enclosure of the digital commons while GPL defends them. When code stays open, we retain collective sovereignty over the tools shaping society.<a href="https://social.marxist.network/tags/opensource" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#opensource</a> <a href="https://social.marxist.network/tags/freedom" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#freedom</a> <a href="https://social.marxist.network/tags/gpl" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#gpl</a>

N-gated Hacker NewsOh wow, yet another programming language that claims to be "simple" and "fast" with syntax like Java and C. Because that's just what the world needed, another spin on the same old tune! 🤦‍♂️🎵 And don't worry, it's under the <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/GNU" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GNU</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a>, so you can enjoy all the <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/open" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#open</a>-source drama too! 🎉 <a href="https://pike.lysator.liu.se/" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://pike.lysator.liu.se/</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/programminglanguages" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#programminglanguages</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/simplicity" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#simplicity</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/techdrama" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#techdrama</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/HackerNews" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#HackerNews</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/ngated" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#ngated</a>

Larry GarfieldForked by Microsoft.<a href="https://philiplaine.com/posts/getting-forked-by-microsoft/" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://philiplaine.com/posts/getting-forked-by-microsoft/</a><a href="https://phpc.social/tags/FreeSoftware" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#FreeSoftware</a> <a href="https://phpc.social/tags/OpenSource" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#OpenSource</a> <a href="https://phpc.social/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a>

Vector HugoSometimes I see <a href="https://mas.to/@alternativeto" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@alternativeto</a> pushing quite a lot of commercial software and wonder about the perceived shift of perspective.<a href="https://burma.social/tags/CAD" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#CAD</a> <a href="https://burma.social/tags/CAM" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#CAM</a> for example: Artsoft's Mach3 & Mach4 are listed separately as controllers, but not the <a href="https://burma.social/tags/FreeSoftware" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#FreeSoftware</a> <a href="https://burma.social/tags/OpenSouce" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#OpenSouce</a> alternative <a href="https://burma.social/tags/UGS" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#UGS</a>?! Even <a href="https://burma.social/tags/YouTube" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#YouTube</a> is better in the case of <a href="https://burma.social/tags/CNC" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#CNC</a> since the existence of <a href="https://burma.social/tags/UniversalGCODEsender" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#UniversalGCODEsender</a> isn't censored (like covid).Please, stop the progress of <a href="https://burma.social/tags/enshitification" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#enshitification</a> and save the much appreciated website with more <a href="https://burma.social/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a> alternatives. TY

Kyle DavisAnyone have a Elegoo Centauri Carbon?Just watched ModBot's video on the printer and it _reallllly_ looks like it's running Fluidd (<a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a> 3) yet the company says "Nope something different." Do we have another case of a <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/3dPrinting" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#3dPrinting</a> company flagrantly ignoring <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/foss" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#foss</a> licensing? <a href="https://youtu.be/rVrsEwb7DKs?t=548" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://youtu.be/rVrsEwb7DKs?t=548</a>

Bradley M. KuhnDear <a href="https://universeodon.com/@georgetakei" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@georgetakei</a> Sorry to bother you. I spent my career working on policy issues in Free & <a href="https://floss.social/tags/OpenSource" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#OpenSource</a> software. I didn't write the code for Mastodon/fediverse, but I invented the licensing structure it uses called Affero <a href="https://floss.social/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a> — its licensing ensures equal rights between companies, individuals, hobbyists, & enthusiasts. You've been a hero of mine since I was 11 years old. I have been crying with joy for 5 minutes upon discovering you use this platform.Thank you for everything. 🥹

seungjinI bought hardware, but they will discontinue its service without providing any alternative options for me to use the hardware (such as open-source hardware control)—unless I switch to Google. It seems my hardware won't function properly without their services. Then, why did I pay for the hardware? One example of why AGPL matters. <a href="https://mstd.seungjin.net/tags/agpl" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#agpl</a> <a href="https://mstd.seungjin.net/tags/gpl" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#gpl</a> <a href="https://mstd.seungjin.net/tags/opensource" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#opensource</a>

Alfred M. Szmidt<a href="https://fosstodon.org/@wickedsmoke" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@wickedsmoke</a> And it is not an issue with the <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/GNU" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GNU</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a> ... there is no reason to stay away from the GPL, rather than... license compatibility is a mess no matter what license one picks.OpenSSL could change their license to something that is GPLv2 compatible, or git to something that is GPLv3-only / -and-or-later. They could also do more work on being compliant., just cause something is free software doesn't mean you have no obligations.<a href="https://fosstodon.org/@mort" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@mort</a>

mortTIL that if your software is licensed under the GPL, you can't link against OpenSSL or other Apache-licensed libraries, either directly or indirectly: <a href="https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1094969" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1094969</a>I mean you *can*, at least wrt. OpenSSL, but only if the entity which distributes your software doesn't also distribute OpenSSL. Meaning distros can't distribute your software, and you can't distribute a bundle with your software + OpenSSL.What a mess. Staying away from <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a> from now on. <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/foss" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#foss</a> <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/opensource" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#opensource</a> <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/freesoftware" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#freesoftware</a>

seungjinI am very worried that there is more and more software around me with MIT- or Apache-like licenses, rather than GPL-like ones—especially in the <a href="https://mstd.seungjin.net/tags/Linux" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#Linux</a> world. I have received many benefits from <a href="https://mstd.seungjin.net/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a> software specifically because it is <a href="https://mstd.seungjin.net/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a>, and I want the next generation to have the same benefits I have had as well.

Free Software FoundationWhy <a href="https://hostux.social/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a>? "Using the <a href="https://hostux.social/tags/GNU" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GNU</a> GPL will require that all the released improved versions be free software. This means you can avoid the risk of having to compete with a proprietary modified version of your own work." More at <a href="https://u.fsf.org/3kr" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://u.fsf.org/3kr</a>

FedeMás allá de la GPLEn los años 80 y de la mano de Richard Stallman, la Licencia Pública General (GPL) fue una herramienta disruptiva. Proponía una mirada diferente sobre la propiedad intelectual en el software al tiempo que habilitaba nuevas prácticas de colaboración y circulación del conocimiento técnico. Pero las condiciones socio-económicas y culturales han cambiado mucho desde entonces. En el panorama actual lo “abierto” no solo convive con estructuras de poder económico concentrado sino que también lo traccionan y sostienen. Entonces ¿qué papel ocupan hoy las licencias “libres” y “abiertas”?¿Qué es (y qué fue) la GPL?La GPL surgió, impulsada por el movimiento del software libre, como respuesta al modelo del software propietario: cerrado, restrictivo, controlado por empresas. La licencia permite usar, estudiar, modificar y redistribuir el software, pero bajo una serie de condiciones (“libertades” del software): cualquier derivado debe mantenerse bajo la misma licencia. De este modo, se buscaba evitar la apropiación privada de desarrollos compartidos. La licencia establece un marco legal con cláusulas específicas. No se trata de una cesión total de derechos, sino de una estructura que condiciona el acceso para preservar la apertura y la colaboración a largo plazo.¿Dónde estamos parados hoy?En el curso de los últimos 40 años, el software libre dejó de ser una práctica marginal para convertirse en una parte fundamental de la infraestructura digital global. Y en este proceso, las corporaciones tecnológicas aprendieron a usar —y a veces financiar— proyectos libres, integrándolos a sus propios modelos de negocio.Hoy, muchos servicios corporativos se apoyan en componentes abiertos, pero eso no significa que respeten ni reproduzcan las condiciones de igualdad o colaboración con que fueron concebidos. El código es abierto, pero el entorno en que se lo utiliza muchas veces no lo es.Como parte de la transformación de las formas de producción, surgieron paralelamente nuevas formas de organización: fundaciones, consorcios, iniciativas híbridas entre lo comunitario y lo empresarial. Estas estructuras ofrecen soporte legal, recursos y visibilidad, pero también suelen depender en gran parte del financiamiento de grandes empresas, que influyen en los criterios de sostenibilidad y dirección de los proyectos y exponen a los desarrollos abiertos al riesgo de quedar subordinados a agendas externas, más ligadas a la eficiencia de mercado que a la colaboración horizontal.Producción abierta, rentabilidad cerradaComo parte del paisaje que venimos describiendo, una parte importante y mayoritaria de las personas que contribuyen activamente a proyectos de código abierto no reciben paga por su trabajo, a pesar de que muchos de esos desarrollos son esenciales para empresas multimillonarias. Es decir, existe una asimetría entre quienes producen valor y quienes lo capitalizan.La producción distribuida de software, habilitada por licencias como la GPL, permite innovar colectivamente, pero también abarata costos para actores con capacidad de transformar ese trabajo en ingresos. Esto pone en tensión el sentido original de muchas iniciativas abiertas, que no fueron pensadas para alimentar plataformas cerradas o modelos de concentración económica.¿Y entonces… qué hacemos?En este escenario, los proyectos y comunidades de software libre enfrentan un desafío urgente: cómo sostenerse sin perder autonomía, sin depender exclusivamente del voluntarismo ni quedar atrapados en lógicas corporativas. Muchos proyectos clave (incluidos aquellos que sostienen parte de Internet) funcionan gracias al tiempo y el trabajo no remunerado de personas que colaboran por compromiso, interés o necesidad, sin garantías de continuidad. En paralelo, la financiación directa por parte de personas usuarias o comunidades es inestable y no siempre alcanza para cubrir los costos de desarrollo, mantenimiento y seguridad.Entonces, ¿cómo se protege y sostiene un bien común digital en un entorno marcado por lógicas de mercado? ¿Es suficiente con tener una licencia clara y restrictiva, como la GPL, para preservar la colaboración abierta? ¿O necesitamos pensar nuevas herramientas institucionales, legales y comunitarias para que esa apertura no termine siendo cooptada?El problema, ciertamente, no es solo técnico ni jurídico, sino también cultural y organizativo. Las licencias son marcos legales, pero no alcanzan por sí solas si no hay personas dispuestas a sostener una práctica colectiva, a discutir cómo se toman decisiones, cómo se distribuyen los recursos, cómo se cuidan los proyectos a largo plazo.Quizás sea hora de pensar nuevas estrategias: más allá de las licencias, más allá del entusiasmo por lo abierto. Estrategias colectivas que no solo regulen el acceso al conocimiento, sino también su sostenibilidad, su dirección y su sentido.<a class="hashtag" href="https://fe.disroot.org/tag/softwarelibre" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#SoftwareLibre</a> <a class="hashtag" href="https://fe.disroot.org/tag/gpl" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a> <a class="hashtag" href="https://fe.disroot.org/tag/capitalismo" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#Capitalismo</a>

immibisThe <a class="hashtag" href="https://social.immibis.com/tag/gnu" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GNU</a> <a class="hashtag" href="https://social.immibis.com/tag/gpl" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a> and <a class="hashtag" href="https://social.immibis.com/tag/agpl" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#AGPL</a> have annoyingly specific GNU-isms which makes them less widely useful than a lot of people seem to think - with regard to dependencies, system libraries, banners at program startup, and so on. They should work for GNU programs but this isn't one. Does anyone know of a similar license that generalizes better?

Free Software FoundationFrom the preamble of the <a href="https://hostux.social/tags/GNU" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GNU</a> <a href="https://hostux.social/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a>: '[T]he GNU General Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change all versions of a program--to make sure it remains free software for all its users. [...]' <a href="https://u.fsf.org/3kz" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://u.fsf.org/3kz</a>

Marcus GreenSTACK Webinar videoThe video from my <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/Moodle" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#Moodle</a> Academy webinar on <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/maths" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#maths</a> education using the <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/STACK" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#STACK</a> question type. I do get quite excited during the presentation. I can make all sample questions available on request. I amused myself again when I heard me mention what I would do if I were/was independently wealthy.<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdLkb2dderM" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdLkb2dderM</a>Here is the hosting service we offer<a href="https://www.catalyst-eu.net/service/moodle-stack-hosting" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://www.catalyst-eu.net/service/moodle-stack-hosting</a>(but it is all <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a> )<a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/edtech" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#edtech</a> <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/math" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#math</a> <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/mathematics" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#mathematics</a> <a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/stackmaths" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#stackmaths</a>

Free Software FoundationAt the FSF, the licensing team is often asked, "What is the difference between an 'aggregate' and other kinds of 'modified versions'?" Read the answer on our <a href="https://hostux.social/tags/GNUGPLFAQ" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GNUGPLFAQ</a>: <a href="https://u.fsf.org/3tx" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://u.fsf.org/3tx</a> <a href="https://hostux.social/tags/GPL" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#GPL</a>

Recent searches

Search options

Administered by:

Server stats:

#gpl