3 ms·
Whoops you're right. I read it twice and completely overlooked that part. Also one of the seven bullet points points in that direction. I read it as a more "bi
by navane 11mo ago
Whoops you're right. I read it twice and completely overlooked that part. Also one of the seven bullet points points in that direction.
I read it as a more "big corps exploiting open source devs" take (as were six out of seven bullet points), but they did indeed slip that in, and concluded with it even.
- generalizations 11mo agoUpvoted but felt bad for not replying. Yeah, I initially read it as a generic "big corps exploiting open source devs" take as well. Not often someone actually says "whoops you're right" so kudos - not sure I would've done the same. The article is an interesting philosophical situation where you know the intent is good. But maybe, they took it too far without any of the necessary caveats.