5 ms·

I'm 100% with you on that. Strong free software leadership (e.g. classic Torvalds), despite all its problems, is naturally anti-corporation. Anyone with a real

by artyom 3y ago

I'm 100% with you on that. Strong free software leadership (e.g. classic Torvalds), despite all its problems, is naturally anti-corporation. Anyone with a real job in a moderately Big Co. can tell you that.

wkat4242 3y ago
Is it really though? Look at the who's who of the Linux foundation and it's all the big tech lackeys deciding everything. Even very questionable companies like Huawei are highly represented. I don't call that anti-corporate.
- xyzzy_plugh 3y ago
  Cue gratuitous eye roll. The Linux foundation is not equal to Linux. The entire point of the Linux foundation is to interface with the rest of the world's beuracracies, corporations included. Anyone can be represented by putting in the work and putting up the cash. Ultimately corporate garbage rarely leaks into the kernel proper. Most of the filth is off in driver land, which isn't even that bad given it's always going to be a vendor landfill.
  - artyom 3y ago
    Yup, exactly the point. Corporate garbage not making it into the kernel is solely the outcome of Torvalds-like style of saying "this is garbage and you're an *diot", where it's very rare that any processes or governance bodies would do anything about it.
- bombolo 3y ago
  To non-americans, all the companies in the linux foundation are as questionable as huawei.
  - beebeepka 3y ago
    Exactly. But we're on a US site where shitting on anything China is almost a guaranteed karma boost. Some posts are literally impossible to downvote.
- Dah00n 3y ago
  >Even very questionable companies like Huawei That is an extremely Americanized take on that awful member list. Is Intel's history of being anticompetitive better? How about their presence in Israel? Is Meta better? Microsoft? To a non-American, many (most) of those companies are worse than Huawei. Actually, any company who share user data with the government (as shown by Snowden) is much worse than Huawei.
  - thefurdrake 3y ago
    > Actually, any company who share user data with the government (as shown by Snowden) is much worse than Huawei. Implicit bias exposed by trying to remove Huawei from the list of companies that share data with their government, combined with whataboutism trying to distract from the meaning of the comment by focusing on a minor item provided as an example.
wahnfrieden 3y ago
Anti-corporate licenses would be the Peer Production License, Anti-Capitalist Software License, etc. whereas GPL/MIT/Apache etc. are all extremely corporate-friendly as can be plainly seen by the companies that have adopted them. However GPL software being corporate-friendly can be a good thing if it leads to "exvestments" into public goods that create alternatives to corporate software (such as with Linux) in ways that are not direct investments into corporate aims
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

by artyom 3y ago

wkat4242 3y ago

Is it really though? Look at the who's who of the Linux foundation and it's all the big tech lackeys deciding everything. Even very questionable companies like Huawei are highly represented. I don't call that anti-corporate.

xyzzy_plugh 3y ago
Cue gratuitous eye roll. The Linux foundation is not equal to Linux. The entire point of the Linux foundation is to interface with the rest of the world's beuracracies, corporations included. Anyone can be represented by putting in the work and putting up the cash. Ultimately corporate garbage rarely leaks into the kernel proper. Most of the filth is off in driver land, which isn't even that bad given it's always going to be a vendor landfill.
- artyom 3y ago
  Yup, exactly the point. Corporate garbage not making it into the kernel is solely the outcome of Torvalds-like style of saying "this is garbage and you're an *diot", where it's very rare that any processes or governance bodies would do anything about it.
bombolo 3y ago
To non-americans, all the companies in the linux foundation are as questionable as huawei.
- beebeepka 3y ago
  Exactly. But we're on a US site where shitting on anything China is almost a guaranteed karma boost. Some posts are literally impossible to downvote.
Dah00n 3y ago
>Even very questionable companies like Huawei That is an extremely Americanized take on that awful member list. Is Intel's history of being anticompetitive better? How about their presence in Israel? Is Meta better? Microsoft? To a non-American, many (most) of those companies are worse than Huawei. Actually, any company who share user data with the government (as shown by Snowden) is much worse than Huawei.
- thefurdrake 3y ago
  > Actually, any company who share user data with the government (as shown by Snowden) is much worse than Huawei. Implicit bias exposed by trying to remove Huawei from the list of companies that share data with their government, combined with whataboutism trying to distract from the meaning of the comment by focusing on a minor item provided as an example.

wahnfrieden 3y ago

Anti-corporate licenses would be the Peer Production License, Anti-Capitalist Software License, etc. whereas GPL/MIT/Apache etc. are all extremely corporate-friendly as can be plainly seen by the companies that have adopted them. However GPL software being corporate-friendly can be a good thing if it leads to "exvestments" into public goods that create alternatives to corporate software (such as with Linux) in ways that are not direct investments into corporate aims

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]