4 ms·
If you’re going to throw the commandments of software freedom at someone to make your point you do not get to exclude exactly the part that explicitly contradic
by close04 1y ago
If you’re going to throw the commandments of software freedom at someone to make your point you do not get to exclude exactly the part that explicitly contradicts what you say with a dismissive “except that, that doesn’t count” because it doesn’t fit your ideas.
A license that gives freedom but not gratuity fits the rules you quoted. The general topic is far from an open and shut case so I’m happy to debate arguments with you, but not the lazy, disingenuous way.
- pessimizer 1y ago> forbidding reselling. You absolutely cannot forbid reselling and call yourself Free Software. So what are you talking about?
- close04 1y agoI am talking about the 4 rules posted by GP above [0] from FSF’s definition of free software, after selectively removing the part that wasn’t aligned with their point, then calling that part “moot”. I was not talking about the content of the article. The comment thread starting at the link below will provide all the context. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45604819 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45604819
- mcny 1y agoI don't see freedom two as having a qualification of "helping your neighbor". My interpretation is you can share anything you have with anyone else, even Amazon dot com and it (Amazon dot com) will have all the rights you have.