4 ms·

At what point are open source projects going to change their licensing to prevent the major cloud providers from just stealing their products? I highly doubt AW

At what point are open source projects going to change their licensing to prevent the major cloud providers from just stealing their products? I highly doubt AWS built this from scratch. Amazon, Google, and Microsoft are going to choke the life out of these projects Redis and MongoDB at least seem to have woken up https://www.geekwire.com/2018/open-source-companies-considering-closed-approach/ https://www.geekwire.com/2018/open-source-companies-consider...

lima 8y ago
Why not? InfluxDB does not have these capabilities.
Jedd 8y ago
> At what point are open source projects going to change their licensing to prevent the major cloud providers from just stealing their products? There's a lot to unravel in there. I prefer 'free software' to 'open source' as it has a clearer meaning, especially in this context. Even so, no one can steal free / open source software (or as you say, product -- though that turn strongly implies a commercial offering). By definition you can't really stop anyone from using your free software, unless perhaps you start naming companies explicitly, but I can't imagine it'd be an easy process, or have a happy outcome, if you started targeting 'major cloud providers' for special conditions. Note that I am not an apologist for AWS, Google, Microsoft, etc - but it feels like the fundamental problem here is not massive corporations charging other people to access free software.
- SEJeff 8y ago
  Free software and open source aren't always the same thing though. Free Software is software that through the license enforces a philosophy. Open source is software that through the license enforces the source code to remain open. I'm not a fan of RMS or his attitudes on most things, but am a strong OSS fan as it is the best way to develop and maintain software.
  - Jedd 8y ago
    > Free software and open source aren't always the same thing though. Entirely agree, hence I drew the distinction. I eschew 'open source' as it's highly ambiguous, and mostly misses the point. > Free Software is software that through the license enforces a philosophy. I would disagree. Free software ensures the user has certain freedoms. > Open source is software that through the license enforces the source code to remain open. This is a very circular definition -- open source is open. > I'm not a fan of RMS or his attitudes on most things, but am a strong OSS fan as it is the best way to develop and maintain software. As it happens, rms is no fan of OSS.
    - SEJeff 8y ago
      RMS has said publically that proprietary software should be illegal, and that free software guarantees user freedoms. This is a philosophy, and one that opines every user wants to become a developer. For things like emacs, and much of GNU, this is true, for most of the rest of the world, this is not. I eschew free software because I'm not about forcing my views on others (which is literally the mission of GNU). I'm about developing software to be the best it can be, and maybe meeting some friends along the way. Open source, being the best software development model overall, allows me to meet that goal. You could almost say some of RMS's more extreme quirks border on authoritarian (see the example with the abortion joke in the libc manual he FORBADE removal of and demanded be re-added when a dev simply overruled him). He's not acting in a manner that encourages "freedom", but as a simple and obvious dictator of all things GNU or claiming to be GNU. He's frequently tried to shape the path of GNOME (which I am a former foundation member and was on the sysadmin team) in areas he literally has no business weighing in on. Then there are some more gross personality problems, like his sexism, or tendency to actually eat his toenail gunk[1], or to ever refuse to be wrong on anything, even when an entire community disagrees with him. Dr Stallman has done a great deal of good for the world with Free Software, however like the VAX and PDP-11, his time has passed. Open source won just like Linux won over GNU/Hurd. It is ok that he won, by losing. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ
      - 8y ago
mritun 8y ago
> I highly doubt AWS built this from scratch Unfounded doubt.

lima 8y ago

Why not? InfluxDB does not have these capabilities.

Jedd 8y ago

> At what point are open source projects going to change their licensing to prevent the major cloud providers from just stealing their products? There's a lot to unravel in there. I prefer 'free software' to 'open source' as it has a clearer meaning, especially in this context. Even so, no one can steal free / open source software (or as you say, product -- though that turn strongly implies a commercial offering). By definition you can't really stop anyone from using your free software, unless perhaps you start naming companies explicitly, but I can't imagine it'd be an easy process, or have a happy outcome, if you started targeting 'major cloud providers' for special conditions. Note that I am not an apologist for AWS, Google, Microsoft, etc - but it feels like the fundamental problem here is not massive corporations charging other people to access free software.

SEJeff 8y ago
Free software and open source aren't always the same thing though. Free Software is software that through the license enforces a philosophy. Open source is software that through the license enforces the source code to remain open. I'm not a fan of RMS or his attitudes on most things, but am a strong OSS fan as it is the best way to develop and maintain software.
- Jedd 8y ago
  > Free software and open source aren't always the same thing though. Entirely agree, hence I drew the distinction. I eschew 'open source' as it's highly ambiguous, and mostly misses the point. > Free Software is software that through the license enforces a philosophy. I would disagree. Free software ensures the user has certain freedoms. > Open source is software that through the license enforces the source code to remain open. This is a very circular definition -- open source is open. > I'm not a fan of RMS or his attitudes on most things, but am a strong OSS fan as it is the best way to develop and maintain software. As it happens, rms is no fan of OSS.
  - SEJeff 8y ago
    RMS has said publically that proprietary software should be illegal, and that free software guarantees user freedoms. This is a philosophy, and one that opines every user wants to become a developer. For things like emacs, and much of GNU, this is true, for most of the rest of the world, this is not. I eschew free software because I'm not about forcing my views on others (which is literally the mission of GNU). I'm about developing software to be the best it can be, and maybe meeting some friends along the way. Open source, being the best software development model overall, allows me to meet that goal. You could almost say some of RMS's more extreme quirks border on authoritarian (see the example with the abortion joke in the libc manual he FORBADE removal of and demanded be re-added when a dev simply overruled him). He's not acting in a manner that encourages "freedom", but as a simple and obvious dictator of all things GNU or claiming to be GNU. He's frequently tried to shape the path of GNOME (which I am a former foundation member and was on the sysadmin team) in areas he literally has no business weighing in on. Then there are some more gross personality problems, like his sexism, or tendency to actually eat his toenail gunk[1], or to ever refuse to be wrong on anything, even when an entire community disagrees with him. Dr Stallman has done a great deal of good for the world with Free Software, however like the VAX and PDP-11, his time has passed. Open source won just like Linux won over GNU/Hurd. It is ok that he won, by losing. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ
    - 8y ago

mritun 8y ago

> I highly doubt AWS built this from scratch Unfounded doubt.