4 ms·

> and decided to release it for the benefit of the community I don't understand. You're saying “for the benefit of the community”, but then only speak about co

> and decided to release it for the benefit of the community I don't understand. You're saying “for the benefit of the community”, but then only speak about companies as negative examples. (1) Are companies inherently incapable of being members of the community to you? (2) Are people whose software is more liberally licensed (and may wish to incorporate parts of yours) not part of the community to you?

saagarjha 7y ago
Presumably companies who are not willing to give back to the community are not part of the community for them, nor are people who enable people who do not give back to the community part of the community (in certain cases). (The community, of course, being "people who are willing to keep their work available to all other members of the community".)
abdullahkhalids 7y ago
OP clearly said > never giving back AGPL allows companies to use the product, while also guaranteeing that they contribute back. And community = entities who contribute back.
- kazinator 7y ago
  The AGPL is about the operator of software not being legally allowed to hide nefarious code on their servers that harms users. The problem is that if you're a big enough monopolist prooviding some online service that people have to use, you can do that in the open. You just comply with the AGPL and reveal all the code that tracks users or discriminates or whatever Bad Stuff. At the end of the day, the code is still running, and vast numbers of users are still logging in. Basically, the AGPL has no real teeth; it gives the users no real control over the program they are using, only some visibility into it. Nefarious behavior can be hidden in configurations, not just code. And in other services. Like suppose a server program, at some point in its execution, makes a HTTPS request to another server. The URL, including parameters and an POST data, are driven by data from a configuration database. Oops! Who knows what the heck that is doing? But, hey, if you want to run such a thing on your own machine, here is the source code.

saagarjha 7y ago

Presumably companies who are not willing to give back to the community are not part of the community for them, nor are people who enable people who do not give back to the community part of the community (in certain cases). (The community, of course, being "people who are willing to keep their work available to all other members of the community".)

abdullahkhalids 7y ago

OP clearly said > never giving back AGPL allows companies to use the product, while also guaranteeing that they contribute back. And community = entities who contribute back.

kazinator 7y ago
The AGPL is about the operator of software not being legally allowed to hide nefarious code on their servers that harms users. The problem is that if you're a big enough monopolist prooviding some online service that people have to use, you can do that in the open. You just comply with the AGPL and reveal all the code that tracks users or discriminates or whatever Bad Stuff. At the end of the day, the code is still running, and vast numbers of users are still logging in. Basically, the AGPL has no real teeth; it gives the users no real control over the program they are using, only some visibility into it. Nefarious behavior can be hidden in configurations, not just code. And in other services. Like suppose a server program, at some point in its execution, makes a HTTPS request to another server. The URL, including parameters and an POST data, are driven by data from a configuration database. Oops! Who knows what the heck that is doing? But, hey, if you want to run such a thing on your own machine, here is the source code.