3 ms·
So if its a hobby project designed for just a handful of people, its suddenly okay to endanger them due to being sloppy?
by zwnow 1y ago
So if its a hobby project designed for just a handful of people, its suddenly okay to endanger them due to being sloppy?
- hypeatei 1y agoThis is an open source project that you're not obligated to use nor did you pay for it. Who is it endangering? The license also makes it clear that the authors aren't liable for any damages.
- flykespice 1y ago...and what open source software license in the world makes the author liable for damages?
- k_roy 1y agoProbably more of lack of explicit liability in the license.
- virtue3 1y agoevery OSS license I've ever seen is "use at your own risk" essentially. That's how this whole system works. You find a vulnerability? patch it, push change to repo maintainer. https://xkcd.com/2347 https://xkcd.com/2347
- flykespice 1y agoPretty sure the all caps text on the bottom of most open source licenses out there makes it clear
- Yeask 1y agoNone. That is how RedHat makes money.
- account42 1y ago> The license also makes it clear that the authors aren't liable for any damages. The license disclaims liability but that doesn't mean the author cannot ever be held liable. Ultimately, who is liable is up to a court to decide.
- nkrisc 1y agoThe code nor author don’t endanger anyone. Whoever uses it inappropriately endangers themselves or others. Why are you using random, unvetted and unaudited code where safety is important?
- Yeask 1y agoOpen Source is about sharing knowledge. They are sharing their knowledge about how to create a tiny JSON parser. Where is the problem again?
- tossaway0 1y agoYes, pretty much. It has enough of a warning.