4 ms·
Very well worded, diplomatic, and 'safe' views. However it is clear that the global leadership and rights holders have discovered that they can take a sledgeham
by Santosh83 6y ago
Very well worded, diplomatic, and 'safe' views. However it is clear that the global leadership and rights holders have discovered that they can take a sledgehammer to the freedoms of collective society and most of us will not even comprehend the real issues in our ennui, and a few will murmur and very few will actively pushback.
In a better society, it ought not have been possible to take down general purpose software with dubious claims of their "clear intent".
- atomi 6y agoIt's not even that. This is an ideological fight we should be having. Code is speech and code should be protected by all like free speech is under the first amendment. This is modern day book burning.
- ravi-delia 6y agoI'm pretty sure books have been protected by copyright too for a while now.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- atomi 6y agoNot to confuse the point, this is about your right to publish your own code.
- valtism 6y agoThat seems like an overly simplistic view of what code is, and what code can be.
- atomi 6y agoIt's the opposite of simplistic. I believe the developer's constitutional rights were violated and I would contact the EFF and ACLU for help. For some context, at one point: > the US government designated encryption software as a "munition" https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/04/remembering-case-established-code-speech https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/04/remembering-case-estab...
- ChrisLomont 6y agoFree speech has limitations. If code is speech, then don’t those limitations also apply to code?