Re: [hackers] [libzahl] Switch to ISC license. || Mattias Andrée

From: Mattias Andrée <>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 23:00:43 +0200

On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 22:20:42 +0200
FRIGN <> wrote:

> On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 22:01:47 +0200
> Mattias Andrée <> wrote:
> Hey Mattias,
> > Do you think anyone have choked on pastries before and
> > sued? Do most countries actually require that you state
> > that your are not responsible for damages causes by
> > something you are warning about? The warning is enough
> > here, or at least I have never seen a disclaimer, only
> > a warning label, and we don't even have translation for
> > ‘disclaimer’.
> it's not about countries, but commercial law. If you hit
> a judge who is not very smart when it comes to computers
> you can have a bad day and actually get sued for such
> damages. Why take the risk?

Of course you should avoid the risk. Therefore, disclaimers
will be necessary until everyone agrees otherwise.

> > Nice one, but I think the FreeBSD project does too much
> > GPL-bashing. GPL is a good license, at least if you
> > value free software higher than open source.
> GPL is not about freedom, it's about control. There are

Well, like free software, it is about whom should be in
control. Free software, and therefore the GPL, is about
removing control from the developer and put in into the
user's hand. They are of course welcome do disagree with
this philosophy, but bashing it every chance you get...

> hundreds of examples where companies contributed back
> to non-GPL projects because they are happily using it
> internally (closed) but still value the open source
> character of it.
> The GPL still has the mindset of evil corporations of
> the 90's. There are still evil players today, but
> everbody has to agree that the open source contributions
> of numerous companies cannot be ignored.
> The level of control the GPL forces on you, even if you
> want to write open source software, is insane and
> ridiculous. If you look at it closer, the GPL has
> the characteristics of cancer or a parasite.
> Additionally, by publishing your software under the GPL,
> most companies would not use your code and actually
> write their own version (which is most likely worse and
> full of bugs). This leads to the situation of many
> people actually having a really bad time with software,
> because the software they buy is actually full of
> horrible horrible code that could be avoided.
> In theory, the wonderland the GPL proposes "works".
> In reality, nowadays, it doesn't make a lot of sense
> any more.
> Richard Stallman used to be right. The companies of
> the 90's were not yet accustomed to an Open Source
> environment, but nowadays, his radical claims are
> just borderline insane. He for instance calls
> OpenBSD a non-free distribution, because they link
> to non-free software in the ports tree.

I don't know how the OpenBSD ports tree look, but I
imagine that they do warn users that the software users
are about to install is non-free. Parabola GNU/Linux
have non-free software in the repository, but they do
warn you, and Parabola is endorsed by the FSF. This
does make since if you believe in free software.

> Keep in mind that OpenBSD is completely blob-free,
> which is only achieved in the Linux-camp by obscure
> distributions nobody uses.
> So, the net-gain is this: The super-radical position
> of the FSF actually does more damage than it brings
> good, as people will never use the obscure FSF-
> distributions. They won't listen to rms's ramblings
> and songs either, because he still has not understood
> the changes the market has undergone in the last decade.
> We generally have to ask ourselves the question if
> we really should ramp up on the FSF anti-propaganda.
> The FSF has the biggest funding of all Open Source
> non-profit organizations (afaik), but what do they
> achieve relative to their size?
> I sometimes regret imagining what the OpenBSD
> foundation would do with all that money. They actually
> write useful software and make a positive impact.
> The FSF's initiatives, especially in regard to
> Gender mainstreaming and other marxist ideologies
> is, to say it likely, a long reach to computer
> science.
> Just food for thought, please don't start a discussion
> here about this. I don't care abour your opinion that
> much anyway.

But you didn't have to write all this. I do not
disagree with you. I just wanted to merely state
that GPL does achieve its goal, a goal there is
nothing wrong with, even if it a bit obsolescent.
The FreeBSD project also suffers from a delicious
of superiority and a compulsion to bash other
projects they believe themselves to be better than.

> Cheers

Received on Thu Jun 02 2016 - 23:00:43 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Jun 02 2016 - 23:12:14 CEST