6 ms·
It's satirical
by bouk 5y ago
It's satirical
- eurasiantiger 5y agoHave you checked how many projects depend on Monkey? It seems the blog post has been translated and reposted many times. Satire does not translate well.
- gpas 5y agoIt crossed my mind... Thanks for chiming in and clear the misunderstanding.
- nextaccountic 5y agoIt seems that you're not interested in suing anyone over this. However, you still don't give people permission to use, not even in small throwaway tests. Which is fair. But your blog post[0] language suggests that you are okay with and even incentivizes people trying this out (even if trying it out might be technically illegal, because it infringes your rights). I think you should have mentioned something about the license in your blog post. As it stands, "If you’re not interested in how it works and you just want to do monkey patching, then you can find the library here." is misleading. If the user wants to do monkey patching, they better not look at your code and program their own solution. [0] https://bou.ke/blog/monkey-patching-in-go/ https://bou.ke/blog/monkey-patching-in-go/
- bouk 5y agoPretty funny right?
- eurasiantiger 5y agoNot in the slightest, but I guess that’s your kick.
- akiselev 5y agoHas anyone ever tested in court whether a license has to be made in good faith to be binding?
- jkaplowitz 5y agoWell, if it isn't binding, then there's no right to reuse it (beyond certain fair use exceptions) under the copyright law that applies by default. For me the question is whether the misleading blog post would be found by a court to be an implicit license separate from the one in the codebase. My guess is that it would depend on several factors including the specific circumstances of the accused infringer and the specifics of contract/copyright law in the relevant jurisdiction, but probably at least sometimes yes.
- nextaccountic 5y agoTIL something can be implicitly licensed. Well the term is implied license https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implied_license https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implied_license
- Vinnl 5y agoAn open source licence generally only gives additional rights. If it's not binding, then default copyright would apply, meaning you're still not allowed to use it.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jamesjansson 5y agoNo, don't screw around with people legally. It makes you look dishonest.
- icedchai 5y agoHow is he screwing around with anyone legally? Has anyone been sued over this? Most of this stuff is unenforceable in any meaningful way. Worst case is really some nasty emails.
- tptacek 5y agoHe does not look dishonest. He looks like the hero we all deserve. Dial it back a bit, would you?
- mdoms 5y agoI think his satire is excellent. Look at how these silly licenses are simultaneously taken very serious and frankly not taken seriously at all. I think he has proven something really quite interesting, and in a pretty amusing way.
- QuadmasterXLII 5y agoI found it really funny!
- concordDance 5y agoYes, I had a chortle, particularly at the reactions in this thread. :D Though I'm an anarchist who thinks people give the law as written far too much weight. (As opposed to what the population as a whole thinks is good or bad)
- hack-news 5y agoNo one gives a fuck what you think, dimwit.
- bryik 5y agoNot really. The JSLint license is funny because objecting to the "The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil." requirement looks like an admission of malintent. Doubly funny that it compelled IBM to ask for explicit permission to use JSLint for evil. Your project, on the other hand, just looks like it was designed to waste people's time. Congrats I guess?
- nhutton1 5y agoI think so. There is also second-order funnyness from all of the very serious nerds who don't find it funny at all. I'm loving it ahah!
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- nextaccountic 5y agoI mean you trolled a lot of devs and they are now salty over this silly thing and uhmm I think it's my poor sense of humor but I don't usually find practical jokes that funny.
- bhaak 5y agoSatire doesn't work very well on the internet in textual context. That's why emoticons were invented.
- bawolff 5y agoWhat is it satirizing? Or is this just a post-hoc "its just a joke bro. Y u mad?" Regardless, its your code, do what you want.
- DangitBobby 5y agoDing ding ding. There is no satire to be found here.