4 ms·

Steve Kondik Comments: Boo hoo, right? I fucked up and got fucked over. It's the Silicon Valley way isn't it? First world problems in the extreme? It hurts, a

Steve Kondik Comments: Boo hoo, right? I fucked up and got fucked over. It's the Silicon Valley way isn't it? First world problems in the extreme? It hurts, a lot. I lost a lot of friends, and I'm truely sorry to everyone I let down. I wish I had made different choices and trusted different people (especially one in particular early on), but all I care about now is figuring out what to do next. This guy pretty much made that rom initially kind of sad what happened to him.

tw04 10y ago
>kind of sad what happened to him. Not really. When he decided to go commercial, he burned a LOT of people. He basically got what was coming to him.
- samfisher83 10y ago
  Is it wrong he wanted to make a little of all the hard work he put into it? He hired a bunch of the community folks that helped with development.
  - baobrain 10y ago
    May I direct you to this [0] G+ post from the dev who made focal? What Kondik did was not just "make a little of all the hard work he put into it." He also blames the cofounder for everything that went wrong. Not his own incompetence or community pushback, just the cofounder. [0]https://plus.google.com/+GuillaumeLesniak/posts/L8FJkrcahPs https://plus.google.com/+GuillaumeLesniak/posts/L8FJkrcahPs
    - vuanotinn 10y ago
      Proof the GPL is cancer.
      - Spivak 10y ago
        This post seems to indicate that the GPL is working exactly as intended.
        vuanotinn 10y ago
        Cancer also works as intended: it kills the host.
        dispose13432 10y ago
        Proof WordPerfect is Cancer!! I'm an OEM, I want to put WordPerfect on my computer, WordPerfect sued me. WaaHaa.
        ggoss 10y ago
        Cancer has no such intention. Like any other organism, it competes for resources with those around it, and survives if it is effective enough at that to do so. Given that it often best characterized by the genetic mutations it has developed relative to the host (thus, it may differ from you genetically significantly more than an identical twin), I believe it is entirely fair to call it a separate organism. An 'extremely effective cancer' (as terrible as this sounds), would survive without regard to the state of the host, as Tasmanian Devil Facial Tumor Disease, which is contagious (transmissible by bite), emerged from a single original host, and has been around for quite a while.
      - cmurf 10y ago
        OK and the long list of software using the GPL, including Linux, proves what?
      - michaelmrose 10y ago
        How is the GPL cancer? Regarding your own software if you don't like the mix of rights and responsibilities it provides don't use it. Your dislike hardly means it isn't a good fit for others. Regarding others software it gives you the right to use their software with no cost providing you are equally free with the fruits of your own labor. Obviously you might not agree with this but what I don't understand is why you have such a caustic attitude. What people commonly seem to believe is that the gpl magically sticks other software because you included gpl code. What actually happens is that you can't legally take other peoples code without following the license. Try this with proprietary software sometime. You will be sued to extinction. If one of your employees includes gpl code in your product you will likely be respectfully asked to either gpl the other code or remove the gpl code and be given ample time to do either. You are 100% able to replace the code you never had a right to and move on the gpl doesn't and can't magically adhere to your code thus calling it "cancer" is silly.
  - fghjllpours 10y ago
    1. Not all core devs were invited 2. He tried getting some GPL software relicensed as Apache under false pretenses. But this is what confuses me. If you don't want this happening, why license your code as Apache? If Samsung would have done this, this would have been hailed as a success of non-copyleft licenses (like when MS used BSD's network stack). Why do they have a problem when a core dev does is?
    - tw04 10y ago
      Because he lied to the developers about what he was trying to do.

tw04 10y ago

>kind of sad what happened to him. Not really. When he decided to go commercial, he burned a LOT of people. He basically got what was coming to him.

samfisher83 10y ago
Is it wrong he wanted to make a little of all the hard work he put into it? He hired a bunch of the community folks that helped with development.
- baobrain 10y ago
  May I direct you to this [0] G+ post from the dev who made focal? What Kondik did was not just "make a little of all the hard work he put into it." He also blames the cofounder for everything that went wrong. Not his own incompetence or community pushback, just the cofounder. [0]https://plus.google.com/+GuillaumeLesniak/posts/L8FJkrcahPs https://plus.google.com/+GuillaumeLesniak/posts/L8FJkrcahPs
  - vuanotinn 10y ago
    Proof the GPL is cancer.
    - Spivak 10y ago
      This post seems to indicate that the GPL is working exactly as intended.
      - vuanotinn 10y ago
        Cancer also works as intended: it kills the host.
        dispose13432 10y ago
        Proof WordPerfect is Cancer!! I'm an OEM, I want to put WordPerfect on my computer, WordPerfect sued me. WaaHaa.
        ggoss 10y ago
        Cancer has no such intention. Like any other organism, it competes for resources with those around it, and survives if it is effective enough at that to do so. Given that it often best characterized by the genetic mutations it has developed relative to the host (thus, it may differ from you genetically significantly more than an identical twin), I believe it is entirely fair to call it a separate organism. An 'extremely effective cancer' (as terrible as this sounds), would survive without regard to the state of the host, as Tasmanian Devil Facial Tumor Disease, which is contagious (transmissible by bite), emerged from a single original host, and has been around for quite a while.
    - cmurf 10y ago
      OK and the long list of software using the GPL, including Linux, proves what?
    - michaelmrose 10y ago
      How is the GPL cancer? Regarding your own software if you don't like the mix of rights and responsibilities it provides don't use it. Your dislike hardly means it isn't a good fit for others. Regarding others software it gives you the right to use their software with no cost providing you are equally free with the fruits of your own labor. Obviously you might not agree with this but what I don't understand is why you have such a caustic attitude. What people commonly seem to believe is that the gpl magically sticks other software because you included gpl code. What actually happens is that you can't legally take other peoples code without following the license. Try this with proprietary software sometime. You will be sued to extinction. If one of your employees includes gpl code in your product you will likely be respectfully asked to either gpl the other code or remove the gpl code and be given ample time to do either. You are 100% able to replace the code you never had a right to and move on the gpl doesn't and can't magically adhere to your code thus calling it "cancer" is silly.
- fghjllpours 10y ago
  1. Not all core devs were invited 2. He tried getting some GPL software relicensed as Apache under false pretenses. But this is what confuses me. If you don't want this happening, why license your code as Apache? If Samsung would have done this, this would have been hailed as a success of non-copyleft licenses (like when MS used BSD's network stack). Why do they have a problem when a core dev does is?
  - tw04 10y ago
    Because he lied to the developers about what he was trying to do.