4 ms·

The FAQ has some interesting entries: Can I use Notcurses in my closed-source program? Notcurses is licensed under Apache2, a demonstration that I have transc

by tux1968 3y ago

The FAQ has some interesting entries: Can I use Notcurses in my closed-source program? Notcurses is licensed under Apache2, a demonstration that I have transcended your petty world of material goods, fiat currencies, and closed sources. Implement Microsoft Bob in it. Charge rubes for it. Put it in your ballistic missiles so that you have a nice LED display of said missile's speed and projected yield; right before impact, scroll "FUCK YOU" in all the world's languages, and close it out with a smart palette fade. Carve the compiled objects onto bricks and mail them to Richard Stallman, taunting him through a bullhorn as you do so.

norir 3y ago
Edginess rarely ages well.
maxbond 3y ago
Chaotic neutral
- networked 3y ago
  No, no, this is lawful neutral.
- zer0zzz 3y ago
  I went to grad school with that guy. He’s a riot.
sillywalk 3y ago
I'm reminded of a similar 'dark' quote from Theo de Raadt in 2001: "...But software which OpenBSD uses and redistributes must be free to all (be they people or companies), for any purpose they wish to use it, including modification, use, peeing on, or even integration into baby mulching machines or atomic bombs to be dropped on Australia..."[0] [0] https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=99118909527873&w=2 https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=99118909527873&w=2
zokier 3y ago
Someone clearly understands what open source is about. It's a pet peeve of mine when devs pick permissive licenses and then act all appalled when it's inevitably not taken as do-no-evil copyleft. If you have expectations, spell them out! We are not mind readers, different people and projects happen in very different contexts and backgrounds. Assuming or even worse, asserting, that there are some common principles or standards beyond whats written down is just narrowminded and maybe even hypocritical.
- benj111 3y ago
  Well, to be fair the brick could be wrapped in a copy of the gpl and stallman would be fine. Presumably the requested source code could also be delivered by a second brick.

norir 3y ago

Edginess rarely ages well.

maxbond 3y ago

Chaotic neutral

networked 3y ago
No, no, this is lawful neutral.
zer0zzz 3y ago
I went to grad school with that guy. He’s a riot.

sillywalk 3y ago

I'm reminded of a similar 'dark' quote from Theo de Raadt in 2001: "...But software which OpenBSD uses and redistributes must be free to all (be they people or companies), for any purpose they wish to use it, including modification, use, peeing on, or even integration into baby mulching machines or atomic bombs to be dropped on Australia..."[0] [0] https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=99118909527873&w=2 https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=99118909527873&w=2

zokier 3y ago

Someone clearly understands what open source is about. It's a pet peeve of mine when devs pick permissive licenses and then act all appalled when it's inevitably not taken as do-no-evil copyleft. If you have expectations, spell them out! We are not mind readers, different people and projects happen in very different contexts and backgrounds. Assuming or even worse, asserting, that there are some common principles or standards beyond whats written down is just narrowminded and maybe even hypocritical.

benj111 3y ago
Well, to be fair the brick could be wrapped in a copy of the gpl and stallman would be fine. Presumably the requested source code could also be delivered by a second brick.