4 ms·
While they ditch Microsoft, Amazon and Oracle: we still use Linux, Sel4, ASML and ARM. There's lots of interesting stuff to watch out for.
by tosapple 8mo ago
While they ditch Microsoft, Amazon and Oracle: we still use Linux, Sel4, ASML and ARM.
There's lots of interesting stuff to watch out for.
- mikeyouse 8mo agoIsn’t Sel4 Australian?
- christophilus 8mo agoAll of the things OP mentioned are non-US tech. I think the OP was speaking from a US perspective, though it’s not clear.
- krzyk 8mo agoWhat's wrong in using Linux. It is an open source project with origins in Finland and still lead by a Fin.
- woodson 8mo ago…who lives in Oregon, in the US.
- amanaplanacanal 8mo agoHey, we'd break away if we could.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- tempsaasexample 8mo agoI spend a month in Oregon every year mushroom hunting and elk hunting. Once you're away from a few key cities, Oregonians are more conservative and hardcore than even central Californians. I think you underestimate your state if you think they're anti American.
- amanaplanacanal 8mo agoThey are a pretty small part of the population though.
- akudha 8mo agoWhat is wrong with using Linux?
- direwolf20 8mo agoLinus Torvalds is very pro–corporate, pro–tivoization, he thinks GPL3 was a terrible mistake.
- palata 8mo agoIs he pro-tivoization, or is he not against it? I heard him talk about GPLv3 someday, and what he said was that it was a mistake to call it "GPLv3", as if it was the evolution of GPLv2, because for him it should have been a totally different licence. Which I find fair: there are different kinds of copyleft (like MPL vs GPL), it makes sense to say that GPLv2 is a different concept than GPLv3. Whereas I don't know if anyone should use GPLv1 because GPLv2 sounds like it fixed GPLv1 without changing its spirit.
- direwolf20 8mo agoGPLv2 was clearly intended to let you change the software on your devices. In some countries, GPLv2 already prohibits tivoization. However, big tech found an exploit: In some countries, GPLv2 allows tivoization. This was not intended by the authors of the GPLv2. There was another exploit involving patent licenses, and a reverse exploit about license termination that allowed some developers to extort some users. They fixed these and made it the GPLv3. It's a bugfix release, not anything new. You only don't like it if you relied on the bugs.
- palata 8mo agoWell, that's not really mutually exclusive with what I said. Those who called it GPLv3 consider it's a bugfix, those who decided to stay on GPLv2 consider it's a new licence.
- imtringued 8mo agoHe is against the "GPLv3 or later clause" because the FSF could change the license terms if it gets hijacked.
- hbogert 8mo agowhat's wrong with using european stuff? (ARM, ASML) :P