3 ms·

Because the code is deployed as a network service, if you make changes to the source code (probably to be a better service provider than others), you have to pu

by remi 16y ago

Because the code is deployed as a network service, if you make changes to the source code (probably to be a better service provider than others), you have to publish your modifications.

loup-vaillant 16y ago
That we all know. What we (I) don't know is why such an obligation will be unappealing to service providers. I understand that service providers could just be morons who needlessly cling to their "intellectual property" for the sake of it. I don't see, however, where a company's changes could be both differentiating and difficult to reproduce when everyone else is collaborating.
- eagleal 16y ago
  Suppose you implement a system based on Diaspora, the next generation of population and governments will use everyday. For various reasons, such as some of the DoD prototype implementations (classified ones), you don't want, or you're required by law to restrict. As you implement the "next-generation system" you don't want the Diaspora guys to take your hard work and make profit of it, distrupting you immediately, because you just started (who are advantaged because they were the first ones, it's a bit like a monopoly, (if you can't see it, try to start a "one-click" hosting for wordpress, after they switch to AGPL)). [1] The other reason is that, such a system is indispensable to this future to work. You would be required by gov law to classify all of your platform (there would be military guards at your data centers :P). edit [1] My point is that they're trenched in their market (the first one should be hosting for Diaspora). Think of it this way, all the people who donated, helped in the process of monopolization of a product they were told would be open (the code yes, but the product it's not).
  - loup-vaillant 16y ago
    OK, thank you. Just 2 points: (1) The DoD making sensitive software communicate with the global internet seems unlikely. And if they stick to private networks, the AGPL doesn't get in their way. (2) I personally won't cry over lost monopolies. Your point was valid, though.
    - eagleal 16y ago
      Glad to have explained it. I was just trying to say that, like the DoD, you may be required to protect the system from the outsiders. I was talking about the foreseeable future tough, maybe we will just evolve as very conscious responsible beings.

by remi 16y ago

Because the code is deployed as a network service, if you make changes to the source code (probably to be a better service provider than others), you have to publish your modifications.

loup-vaillant 16y ago

That we all know. What we (I) don't know is why such an obligation will be unappealing to service providers. I understand that service providers could just be morons who needlessly cling to their "intellectual property" for the sake of it. I don't see, however, where a company's changes could be both differentiating and difficult to reproduce when everyone else is collaborating.

eagleal 16y ago
Suppose you implement a system based on Diaspora, the next generation of population and governments will use everyday. For various reasons, such as some of the DoD prototype implementations (classified ones), you don't want, or you're required by law to restrict. As you implement the "next-generation system" you don't want the Diaspora guys to take your hard work and make profit of it, distrupting you immediately, because you just started (who are advantaged because they were the first ones, it's a bit like a monopoly, (if you can't see it, try to start a "one-click" hosting for wordpress, after they switch to AGPL)). [1] The other reason is that, such a system is indispensable to this future to work. You would be required by gov law to classify all of your platform (there would be military guards at your data centers :P). edit [1] My point is that they're trenched in their market (the first one should be hosting for Diaspora). Think of it this way, all the people who donated, helped in the process of monopolization of a product they were told would be open (the code yes, but the product it's not).
- loup-vaillant 16y ago
  OK, thank you. Just 2 points: (1) The DoD making sensitive software communicate with the global internet seems unlikely. And if they stick to private networks, the AGPL doesn't get in their way. (2) I personally won't cry over lost monopolies. Your point was valid, though.
  - eagleal 16y ago
    Glad to have explained it. I was just trying to say that, like the DoD, you may be required to protect the system from the outsiders. I was talking about the foreseeable future tough, maybe we will just evolve as very conscious responsible beings.