3 ms·
^^ How to say you're a white male in tech, without specifically saying you're a white male in tech. meritocracy - To whom? Who decides? That's right: the kingm
by noasaservice 5y ago
^^ How to say you're a white male in tech, without specifically saying you're a white male in tech.
meritocracy - To whom? Who decides? That's right: the kingmaker. And the kingmaker decides on those who share significant amount of the same traits. And most of these "kingmakers" in tech are 20-30 something white male.
master to primary - Again, "master" in US culture has a very very bad connotation that <drumroll> equates with US slavery of black peoples. ""find . -type f -exec sed -i 's/master/primary/g' {} \; "" takes seconds to run, and only infringes on alt-right sensitivities.
crazy - Is a garbage word. Has no real definition, and just really shouldn't be used. If there's a problem with a person and their choices, the issue with that should be stated, not by calling them "Crazy". Same goes for the rest of the words in your mental illness link. Enumerate the problem at hand, not by labeling the problem with a garbage word that equates to crazy.
> Where they once were just supporting a software project they're now a political movement.
FLOSS has always been political. The predominant license (GPL) is a anti-capitalist license that seeks freedoms from creators to make everyone owners. The AGPL was made to challenge cloud operators in using and not sharing their changes. Again, political.
And the whole FLOSS ecosystem itself is and isn't about computers. It's about how humans interact with computers and other humans using computers - and guaranteeing individual rights when using computers. FLOSS is a human rights issue. So yes, it's completely understandable that high profile projects would seek to include everyone.
- simion314 5y ago>the predominant license (GPL) is a anti-capitalist license GPL and RMS is not anti-capitalist, Linus Torvalds and Red Hat for example made lots of money. So you can have Proprietary license <GPL <BSD and you have dudes that love both proprietary and BSD and hate GPL, my only conclusion that this dudes would like to grab others BSD work and make it proprietary and make tons of money, this is not capitalism ; this is the toxic "How to make XXX$ in 1 month(10 steps) people. let me explain, I see people selling this idea of you buy this cheap crap from China then do a small change , sell the shit and make tons of money with almost no work(I seen other get rich schems too, with books or other stuff). I think some GPL haters would love to grab GPL stuff, put their cheap shit on top and sell it and make tons of money. GPL allows you to make money though, you have to share code though so others could make money too. P.S. I would really like to understand why GPL is anti capitalist or communist in some people mind, is it some FUD or some wrong usage of the notions.