5 ms·

Would your opinion change in any way if it turned out the homeless person donated their kidney to the rich person a couple of years ago? It seems to me that the

Would your opinion change in any way if it turned out the homeless person donated their kidney to the rich person a couple of years ago? It seems to me that the broader context matters here as well.

greedo 6y ago
When someone donates a kidney, they lose the kidney. FBSD didn't lose anything when Apple adopted their freely available code.
- fuy 6y ago
  Eh, still, when someone donates a kidney, someone gets a kidney. You could say FBSD didn't lose anything, but surely Apple did get quite a bit?
- heavyset_go 6y ago
  Someone who uses your code is a potential contributor, either as a customer, licensee, or collaborator. It's a tragedy of the commons scenario, and one could argue that a different license or terms might've prevented FreeBSD from losing those contributors.
ProtoAES256 6y ago
This might be an unpopular opinion, but Apple is a company, not a charity. They shouldn't be held high moral standards. In this kidney-rich person scenario, if the homeless person donated(open source) the kidney without hoping for forced payment in any form, who is it to blame the rich person for not handing out money? They gave only a little sure, but they really really don't have the obligation to donate. It is morally wrong, but morally wrong stuffs are not the reason to got pitchfork on them. My view is that if they donate a huge lump sum of money, great! If they don't, fine by me too.
- rapind 6y ago
  It’s not illegal to for rich kidney recipient to be a douche, but I can still call them out on it. That’s all this is. No one is threatening legal action against Apple. Some of us are just remarking on how douchey they are in regards to open source. Many of us have done so in the past, and yes this small donation is bringing more attention to that.
  - ProtoAES256 6y ago
    I whole-heartedly agree on Apple being the douche here. But discussions should be treaded carefully to a constructive theme instead of another flame war. I still hold my opinion but I did see your point. Edit: Your edit seems to align to my view. Ignore this comment
- messe 6y ago
  > This might be an unpopular opinion, but Apple is a company, not a charity. They shouldn't be held high moral standards Reminds me of Charlie Stross' talk about predicting the future of sociopathic AI's by comparing them to corporations. I think it's a huge issue in modern society that we have these powerful entities treated on a similar footing to people, but that are expected not to have moral standards.

Would your opinion change in any way if it turned out the homeless person donated their kidney to the rich person a couple of years ago? It seems to me that the broader context matters here as well.

greedo 6y ago

When someone donates a kidney, they lose the kidney. FBSD didn't lose anything when Apple adopted their freely available code.

fuy 6y ago
Eh, still, when someone donates a kidney, someone gets a kidney. You could say FBSD didn't lose anything, but surely Apple did get quite a bit?
heavyset_go 6y ago
Someone who uses your code is a potential contributor, either as a customer, licensee, or collaborator. It's a tragedy of the commons scenario, and one could argue that a different license or terms might've prevented FreeBSD from losing those contributors.

ProtoAES256 6y ago

This might be an unpopular opinion, but Apple is a company, not a charity. They shouldn't be held high moral standards. In this kidney-rich person scenario, if the homeless person donated(open source) the kidney without hoping for forced payment in any form, who is it to blame the rich person for not handing out money? They gave only a little sure, but they really really don't have the obligation to donate. It is morally wrong, but morally wrong stuffs are not the reason to got pitchfork on them. My view is that if they donate a huge lump sum of money, great! If they don't, fine by me too.

rapind 6y ago
It’s not illegal to for rich kidney recipient to be a douche, but I can still call them out on it. That’s all this is. No one is threatening legal action against Apple. Some of us are just remarking on how douchey they are in regards to open source. Many of us have done so in the past, and yes this small donation is bringing more attention to that.
- ProtoAES256 6y ago
  I whole-heartedly agree on Apple being the douche here. But discussions should be treaded carefully to a constructive theme instead of another flame war. I still hold my opinion but I did see your point. Edit: Your edit seems to align to my view. Ignore this comment
messe 6y ago
> This might be an unpopular opinion, but Apple is a company, not a charity. They shouldn't be held high moral standards Reminds me of Charlie Stross' talk about predicting the future of sociopathic AI's by comparing them to corporations. I think it's a huge issue in modern society that we have these powerful entities treated on a similar footing to people, but that are expected not to have moral standards.