4 ms·

>The GPL does not prevent closed versions because of Tivoization, and SaaS. This is exactly what AGPL is for. Of course, AGPL is too overbearing for most proje

>The GPL does not prevent closed versions because of Tivoization, and SaaS. This is exactly what AGPL is for. Of course, AGPL is too overbearing for most projects, and only makes sense for SaaS. >A locked device may prevent the user from running a kernel image that is not signed with a certain private key, even though the vendor of the device complies with the GPL and provides the matching kernel sources and the correct toolchain to reproduce the build without a signature. This is a problem indeed (that most people have forgotten about, due to the shim code that people use to load other operating systems like Linux). It may become a problem in the future so we need to stay vigilant and never support products that lock the bootloader. Unfortunately most phones do that. Phones are a rats nest of proprietary software and hardware and we need more development of open technology in that space.

kazinator 2y ago
The AGPL does squat all for the social problems causes by SaaSS, and only succeeds in being a technically non-free license. Nobody cares if you take some open source server software, and run version that you modified with your own cool features, without sharing the source code, and this is something you're entitled to under the FSF's Freedom Zero. Among the social harms of SaaSS, this is not on the radar; and obsession with it shows either that the FSF are out of touch, or that they think that any action is better than inaction, so that if they take a swing at the problem with the wrong tool (copyright licensing) they look like they gave it a good college try. The problem of SaaSS is people being locked to a service because that's where their data is siloed. This harm can be perpetrated with completely unmodified software you can download yourself. Running your own copy does nothing to solve the problem; your copy is not where the data is, where the other users are.

kazinator 2y ago

The AGPL does squat all for the social problems causes by SaaSS, and only succeeds in being a technically non-free license. Nobody cares if you take some open source server software, and run version that you modified with your own cool features, without sharing the source code, and this is something you're entitled to under the FSF's Freedom Zero. Among the social harms of SaaSS, this is not on the radar; and obsession with it shows either that the FSF are out of touch, or that they think that any action is better than inaction, so that if they take a swing at the problem with the wrong tool (copyright licensing) they look like they gave it a good college try. The problem of SaaSS is people being locked to a service because that's where their data is siloed. This harm can be perpetrated with completely unmodified software you can download yourself. Running your own copy does nothing to solve the problem; your copy is not where the data is, where the other users are.