4 ms·
No one is entitled to a business model. If you can't exist without being ethically sound, then you can't exist - period. Capitalism is not a replacement for eth
by ddevault 7y ago
No one is entitled to a business model. If you can't exist without being ethically sound, then you can't exist - period. Capitalism is not a replacement for ethics.
And in any case: you can sell open-source software.
- DrJokepu 7y agoNobody is entitled to my labor either.
- ddevault 7y agoCorrect. But we are entitled to the source code for programs which run on our computers, or is paid for by our taxes.
- koolba 7y ago> Correct. But we are entitled to the source code for programs which run on our computers, ... No you're not. If you want the source code for the programs to run on your computer either write them yourself, choose FOSS ones, or pay someone to write one that supplies the source. Nobody is mandating you buy a particular piece of software or run it on your computer. You're choosing to do it. If you decide you're not going to run closed source software that's your personal choice. > ... or is paid for by our taxes. That's moving goal posts.
- renewiltord 7y agoHaha, I know that Sourcehut is open-source and you derive revenue from the fact that people prefer to use it as a SaaS product, but it is amusing that the SaaS-ness of it means that your statement only applies to the front-end portion.
- ddevault 7y agoThe SourceHut backend is also open source. A related idea is "if you're handling my data, I'm entitled to view the code which is doing so".
- renewiltord 7y agoRight, right, I know. It's just the style of what you said was amusing, not your actual practice, which is consistent.
- smabie 7y agoWhy are we entitled to it?
- tonyedgecombe 7y agoAnd in any case: you can sell open-source software. Do you do that?
- ddevault 7y agoYes.
- tonyedgecombe 7y agoThat's interesting, I could only see services on your web site. What software do you sell?
- metaobserver 7y agoNo one is entitled to free software and should not expect others to slave off and give away fruits of their hard work for free. This entitled communist mentality is unethical.
- ddevault 7y agoIt's my computer, not yours. If you want to run software on it, I get to see the source code, that's the deal. We could agree that I can't use your software under these terms, but this would exploit those who don't understand the value of the source code. This is how spyware is born. If it runs on my machine, it's open source, or it's bunk. And, once again, you can sell open source software.
- jayshua 7y agoIf two people, in full understanding of the value of source code, both decide for one to provide a proprietary closed-source software and the other to run it in exchange for money - is it still unethical?
- ddevault 7y agoI don't understand your question.
- jayshua 7y agoMaybe I'm misunderstanding your point then. I got from your posts roughly: It is unethical for end-user software to be closed source, everyone is fundamentally entitled to the source code for programs they run on their computer. Further, if an end-user decides not to run the closed-source software, it is still unethical because many people don't understand the value of source code and they are still being exploited when they purchase/run the software. My question: Is it still unethical if the exchange and use of proprietary software is made only between people who fully understand the value of source code and decide to anyway?