3 ms·
> To you, the bar to be able to claim "we love open-source” is to have every single thing you make be open-source? No, my point is that it’s a meaningless stat
by CyberRabbi 5y ago
> To you, the bar to be able to claim "we love open-source” is to have every single thing you make be open-source?
No, my point is that it’s a meaningless statement in this post and that it diminishes the apparent significance of the rest of the post.
- remram 5y agoThat's not a point, that's a claim. They say they do, and they did release one piece of software open source. For the one they didn't release, they provided a rationale as to why not. Why do you claim that it's a "meaningless statement"?
- CyberRabbi 5y ago> Why do you claim that it's a "meaningless statement"? Because whether or not they “love open source” has no bearing on rationally deciding whether or not they should release one of their products as open source. The only function of that statement as far as I can tell is to ingratiate themselves to the reader, i.e. “we’re on your team!” That type of desperate signaling communicates a lack of confidence in their rationalization, which in turn makes it seem disingenuous.
- remram 5y agoWhy do you say it "has no bearing"? From where I stand, they did contribute to opensource and they are opensourcing their other software, Mapperly. That looks like "bearing" to me.
- CyberRabbi 5y agoNo one is disputing their involvement with open source. The point has been made and it should be evident to anyone who understands how rational decisions are made.