19 ms·

Dunno if author is around here, but I'd like to point out a group who are working to make low-spec, low-powerusage software. https://100r.co/site/mission.html

by Hamcha 4y ago

Dunno if author is around here, but I'd like to point out a group who are working to make low-spec, low-powerusage software. https://100r.co/site/mission.html https://100r.co/site/mission.html They're a couple living in a boat (all by choice) making games, music and books/comics. Having encountered challenges like being off the grid for a prolonged amount of time and having to budget electricity for months at a time, they built a whole suite of creative apps that run on an incredibly limited amount of specs, including building a platform akin to PICO8 that can run such creative software on many embedded devices like the Gameboy Advance (https://github.com/hundredrabbits/awesome-uxn https://github.com/hundredrabbits/awesome-uxn)

unsafecast 4y ago
+1 These two are some of the most interesting people I've come across. Both 100r.co and the xxiivv wiki are rabbit holes (ha) I go down in for hours.
kennywinker 4y ago
Orca is a delightful piece of software. A livecoding music creating environment, that’s both simple and very complex. Well worth checking out if you’re interested in any kind of algorithmic music making! One thing I was a little surprised by was that such ideologically minded developers would shy away from a GPL style license for their work. It seems like for a lot of people “viral” open source licenses have fallen out of favour - but I’m not sure why.
- woojoo666 4y ago
  They use an MIT license, which is equally viral. And is copyleft really more ideological than permissive licenses? Copyleft still leverages copyright to its advantage, which can be seen as validating the usefulness of copyright
  - Hamcha 4y ago
    MIT is not viral and it's what makes it so popular, you trade a copyright notice somewhere for the right to re-license to any license of your choosing, that makes it the opposite of viral if anything. > And is copyleft really more ideological than permissive licenses? They are equally as ideological, but copyleft is definitely "louder" in a sense since it actually forces people to play along. > Copyleft still leverages copyright to its advantage, which can be seen as validating the usefulness of copyright Copyleft is an unfortunate name but the fact that it validates copyright doesn't invalidate itself. In a way, copyleft leverages copyright to fight copyright, though that's not really accurate. It's fighting a popular usage of copyright.
    - woojoo666 4y ago
      Ah I thought you meant "viral" as in "popular". My mistake > They are equally as ideological, but copyleft is definitely "louder" in a sense since it actually forces people to play along. That's fair. I guess the ideology behind permissive licenses is to not force anybody to do anything
      - kennywinker 4y ago
        I get what you're saying, but the idea that a license forces you to do something seems a bit of a skewed description. Linux being GPL licensed doesn't force me to do anything. If I want to use linux, I can. If I want to modify linux, then some rules kick in. But it's still opt-in, because you're not being "forced" to leverage the fruits of someone else's labour in the first place. And if you want to leverage others labour, all that's asked is that you make your labour available for others to do the same with. Which is, I guess, what I meant by "ideological". It seems like they are not just sharing some work they've done - they're sharing work that was inspired by a philosophy, and values they're trying to get others to adopt. Which is why it seems like a prime candidate for GPL licensing.

by Hamcha 4y ago

unsafecast 4y ago

+1 These two are some of the most interesting people I've come across. Both 100r.co and the xxiivv wiki are rabbit holes (ha) I go down in for hours.

kennywinker 4y ago

Orca is a delightful piece of software. A livecoding music creating environment, that’s both simple and very complex. Well worth checking out if you’re interested in any kind of algorithmic music making! One thing I was a little surprised by was that such ideologically minded developers would shy away from a GPL style license for their work. It seems like for a lot of people “viral” open source licenses have fallen out of favour - but I’m not sure why.

woojoo666 4y ago
They use an MIT license, which is equally viral. And is copyleft really more ideological than permissive licenses? Copyleft still leverages copyright to its advantage, which can be seen as validating the usefulness of copyright
- Hamcha 4y ago
  MIT is not viral and it's what makes it so popular, you trade a copyright notice somewhere for the right to re-license to any license of your choosing, that makes it the opposite of viral if anything. > And is copyleft really more ideological than permissive licenses? They are equally as ideological, but copyleft is definitely "louder" in a sense since it actually forces people to play along. > Copyleft still leverages copyright to its advantage, which can be seen as validating the usefulness of copyright Copyleft is an unfortunate name but the fact that it validates copyright doesn't invalidate itself. In a way, copyleft leverages copyright to fight copyright, though that's not really accurate. It's fighting a popular usage of copyright.
  - woojoo666 4y ago
    Ah I thought you meant "viral" as in "popular". My mistake > They are equally as ideological, but copyleft is definitely "louder" in a sense since it actually forces people to play along. That's fair. I guess the ideology behind permissive licenses is to not force anybody to do anything
    - kennywinker 4y ago
      I get what you're saying, but the idea that a license forces you to do something seems a bit of a skewed description. Linux being GPL licensed doesn't force me to do anything. If I want to use linux, I can. If I want to modify linux, then some rules kick in. But it's still opt-in, because you're not being "forced" to leverage the fruits of someone else's labour in the first place. And if you want to leverage others labour, all that's asked is that you make your labour available for others to do the same with. Which is, I guess, what I meant by "ideological". It seems like they are not just sharing some work they've done - they're sharing work that was inspired by a philosophy, and values they're trying to get others to adopt. Which is why it seems like a prime candidate for GPL licensing.