3 ms·

It's kinda hard to deeply understand how something work without being able to modify and experiment with it, but yeah, proprietary OSS is still better than prop

by pera 8y ago

It's kinda hard to deeply understand how something work without being able to modify and experiment with it, but yeah, proprietary OSS is still better than proprietary closed source software.

zokier 8y ago
> proprietary OSS is still better than proprietary closed source software. This holds true until you begin looking at bigger picture market economics, then it could be argued that "proprietary OSS" is harming "true free software" by preying on less principled developers (and users).
- josephg 8y ago
  > preying on less principled developers (and users). Oh, please. Non-GPL OSS developer here. I'm not some weak doe in the woods being preyed on by evil companies and their MIT and BSD licensed software. I know exactly why I strike the bargain I do - its because I want to be able to make money selling proprietary extensions and modifications on top of any software I write. And I want to encourage any developers using software I write to do the same. I use BSD/ISC/MIT licenses because I support the right of other developers to make modifications to my software and keep their modifications closed source if they want. I support developers feeding their families. And more $ usually means more ideas, more developers and healthier ecosystem. Get off your high horse. I'm not a "less principled developer". I just have different principles thank you. I think having developers who pay rent writing OSS is a great deal for everyone.
  - absove 8y ago
    permissive free software licenses like BSD are still free software. The comment you were replying to mentions proprietary open source which is another thing.
  - 153791098c 8y ago
    You value (individual) developer freedom more than user freedom. Which is totally fine. However, the goal of Free Software is user freedom. Copyleft licenses help with user freedom because a program released under that license can never be made proprietary by other developers, every contribution to that program will be free so the users (and original dev, and other devs) can benefit from it without sacrificing their freedom.

by pera 8y ago

It's kinda hard to deeply understand how something work without being able to modify and experiment with it, but yeah, proprietary OSS is still better than proprietary closed source software.

zokier 8y ago

> proprietary OSS is still better than proprietary closed source software. This holds true until you begin looking at bigger picture market economics, then it could be argued that "proprietary OSS" is harming "true free software" by preying on less principled developers (and users).

josephg 8y ago
> preying on less principled developers (and users). Oh, please. Non-GPL OSS developer here. I'm not some weak doe in the woods being preyed on by evil companies and their MIT and BSD licensed software. I know exactly why I strike the bargain I do - its because I want to be able to make money selling proprietary extensions and modifications on top of any software I write. And I want to encourage any developers using software I write to do the same. I use BSD/ISC/MIT licenses because I support the right of other developers to make modifications to my software and keep their modifications closed source if they want. I support developers feeding their families. And more $ usually means more ideas, more developers and healthier ecosystem. Get off your high horse. I'm not a "less principled developer". I just have different principles thank you. I think having developers who pay rent writing OSS is a great deal for everyone.
- absove 8y ago
  permissive free software licenses like BSD are still free software. The comment you were replying to mentions proprietary open source which is another thing.
- 153791098c 8y ago
  You value (individual) developer freedom more than user freedom. Which is totally fine. However, the goal of Free Software is user freedom. Copyleft licenses help with user freedom because a program released under that license can never be made proprietary by other developers, every contribution to that program will be free so the users (and original dev, and other devs) can benefit from it without sacrificing their freedom.