3 ms·

Sorry, I can't understand what you mean by that. Do you mean that it's good that companies can profit over people's mostly voluntary efforts for free, or Free

Sorry, I can't understand what you mean by that. Do you mean that it's good that companies can profit over people's mostly voluntary efforts for free, or Free Software is meant to be used for free and never supported in any way, or what? I'm at a loss here.

KronisLV 2mo ago
You are allowed (and encouraged) to do good things without being obligated to. I think it would be immensely cool if OpenAI donated some of that crapload of AI money to the people behind LibreOffice to help with development - and then having like a blog post about it or something would already improve the project's visibility a bit more (hey, every bit helps). What's peanuts to them could help with the sustainability of the project a whole bunch!
- bayindirh 2mo ago
  > You are allowed (and encouraged) to do good things without being obligated to. We're absolutely on the same page with you, and I try to do my best with what I can in that regard. On the other hand, I see a perspective which thinks that companies are entitled to use everything for free and don't need to support the Free Software ecosystem because it's an externality that they don't have to care for, which bothers me a lot. What I was trying to understand that whether this comment was supporting that perspective, or is there something I'm missing entirely.
  - vasco 2mo ago
    You misread that comment so much that I'm not sure going too deep here matters much.
    - bayindirh 2mo ago
      I might have. I'm a human with a different native language. Sorry if that offended you. Was just trying my best.
      - vasco 2mo ago
        Nobody is offended. I'm also not a native speaker.
- pocksuppet 2mo ago
  You are not allowed to do good things. The penalty is more subtle: instead of cops showing up to arrest you, you will be outcompeted in the market. It's really hard to see when this is happening and course-correct, so all rational actors are doing their utmost to prevent it at all times.
cryptonym 2mo ago
They just imply them not having to doesn't dismiss the original comment, thread being more about morals than laws. That being said, hoping for any financial support from AI companies would be really naive. Using others work without retribution is at the core of their model.
- bayindirh 2mo ago
  > That being said, hoping for any financial support from AI companies would be really naive. Using others work without retribution is at the core of their model. I have no such expectations. They believe that they own the world and owe nothing, as you said.
  - pocksuppet 2mo ago
    They have correctly identified that they own the world and owe nothing. If you don't like that, should've used a different license.
    - bayindirh 2mo ago
      I don't use Expat, BSD, CC licenses which allows unattributed free contributions. Nothing I use is permissive. OTOH, do you think they care about source available restrictive licenses or Copyright laws, or laws in general? If you believe so, I have a bridge which you can customize with a text prompt for sale.

KronisLV 2mo ago

You are allowed (and encouraged) to do good things without being obligated to. I think it would be immensely cool if OpenAI donated some of that crapload of AI money to the people behind LibreOffice to help with development - and then having like a blog post about it or something would already improve the project's visibility a bit more (hey, every bit helps). What's peanuts to them could help with the sustainability of the project a whole bunch!

bayindirh 2mo ago
> You are allowed (and encouraged) to do good things without being obligated to. We're absolutely on the same page with you, and I try to do my best with what I can in that regard. On the other hand, I see a perspective which thinks that companies are entitled to use everything for free and don't need to support the Free Software ecosystem because it's an externality that they don't have to care for, which bothers me a lot. What I was trying to understand that whether this comment was supporting that perspective, or is there something I'm missing entirely.
- vasco 2mo ago
  You misread that comment so much that I'm not sure going too deep here matters much.
  - bayindirh 2mo ago
    I might have. I'm a human with a different native language. Sorry if that offended you. Was just trying my best.
    - vasco 2mo ago
      Nobody is offended. I'm also not a native speaker.
pocksuppet 2mo ago
You are not allowed to do good things. The penalty is more subtle: instead of cops showing up to arrest you, you will be outcompeted in the market. It's really hard to see when this is happening and course-correct, so all rational actors are doing their utmost to prevent it at all times.

cryptonym 2mo ago

They just imply them not having to doesn't dismiss the original comment, thread being more about morals than laws. That being said, hoping for any financial support from AI companies would be really naive. Using others work without retribution is at the core of their model.

bayindirh 2mo ago
> That being said, hoping for any financial support from AI companies would be really naive. Using others work without retribution is at the core of their model. I have no such expectations. They believe that they own the world and owe nothing, as you said.
- pocksuppet 2mo ago
  They have correctly identified that they own the world and owe nothing. If you don't like that, should've used a different license.
  - bayindirh 2mo ago
    I don't use Expat, BSD, CC licenses which allows unattributed free contributions. Nothing I use is permissive. OTOH, do you think they care about source available restrictive licenses or Copyright laws, or laws in general? If you believe so, I have a bridge which you can customize with a text prompt for sale.