spacelizard

17 ms·

121.
by spacelizard 13y ago
I read the article you linked and nowhere does it say that things will break. I know it's convenient for you to attack the FSF but the real problem is that RibbonSoft is a proprietary company that is more interested in dual licensing a
122.
by spacelizard 13y ago
That page basically says exactly what I did: There is a work around, they could create an alternate plugin interface specifically for this purpose. However they don't want to because it's "ugly." So after reading that I
123.
by spacelizard 13y ago
The copyright system is to blame because without it there would be no need for them to even think about hiring a lawyer because these complex licensing issues wouldn't even exist. I would advise against looking to blame someone, as t
124.
by spacelizard 13y ago
You can blame the copyright system for that for making it not possible to negotiate license changes in the event the original copyright holder is not contactable for whatever reason. But again, there are workarounds and it makes no sense fo
125.
by spacelizard 13y ago
Yes and there are workarounds for it. If they aren't willing to do a workaround and neither of them are willing to compromise on their position (LibreCAD should probably switch to GPLv3, btw), then it's both of their faults. >t
126.
by spacelizard 13y ago
Those projects aren't doomed to non-collaboration because that is a non-issue. Worst case scenario you'll have to modify one of those projects so they can invoke the other one as an external program. Free software license incompat
127.
by spacelizard 13y ago
Your choice of not wanting to accept the GPL doesn't limit your freedom, you had the choice to accept it and you declined. The fact that the software is copyrighted in the first place is the only thing that could be potentially limitin
128.
by spacelizard 13y ago
Arguably that problem is worse with permissively licensed software. In that case you don't just have the original copyright holder peddling a proprietary uber-version, you have every company and his dog doing it and every version is
129.
by spacelizard 13y ago
Yes, the morass of software licensing sucks. But unfortunately another side effect of that is that not choosing a license or making uninformed decisions about licensing creates situations that end up with users becoming extremely susceptibl
130.
by spacelizard 13y ago
The GPL does not limit freedom, it only limits power. Distributing a binary to a user while denying them the source code, while not strictly a malicious act, is an attack on the user's freedom because it puts the user at a position whe
131.
by spacelizard 13y ago
It's certainly nice that you can study this code freely, but that isn't a good reason for anyone to use it. The restriction stating that "you can only use this to make mods of valve games" seems particularly ridiculous.
132.
by spacelizard 13y ago
The actual problem is that the license they are using is neither a valid free software license nor a valid open source license. The GPL would honestly be their best option if they wished to build a bigger community around Source engine modd
133.
by spacelizard 13y ago
You miss the point of what software freedom is supposed to be about -- it is supposed to give everyone the same ability to understand and modify the software that the original author has. The source code is almost always the most convenient
134.
by spacelizard 13y ago
It doesn't really matter how old the use (or in this case, misuse) of the term is. It is still an affront to the way we consider property in all other aspects. Just because they were doing it a long time ago does not make it any less invali
135.
by spacelizard 13y ago
It's not about "people downloading shit for free" and it has never been about that. Nobody downloads things "for free," there are real costs associated with downloading anything on the internet. If these companies wanted a cut of that it wo
136.
by spacelizard 13y ago
Whoa - I'm not advocating for people to work unpaid. Don't know where you got that idea. I just don't think anything can really honestly advertise itself as being "mod friendly" or "community friendly" unless it's GPL.
137.
by spacelizard 13y ago
>The software industry is heading in very bad directions, and this is at least a glimmer of hope. I don't buy this -- Steam is just another walled garden app store with the same conflicts of interest that we're used to seeing, such as g
138.
by spacelizard 14y ago
I think they should have an interest in it. The toolchain they publish is notoriously out of date and suffers from poor documentation. Why not let the community work on it? There seems to be demand for it.
139.
by spacelizard 14y ago
The real question is, can we expect a FOSS release of old (or new) valve code any time soon? It seems natural given their modder-friendly nature and their shift towards GNU/Linux. Plus, it's about time someone else followed Carmack's exampl
140.
by spacelizard 14y ago
A naive look would make it seem that Steambox is vaporware (no pun intended).
141.
by spacelizard 14y ago
I don't think that's quite correct. I see "gamers" being more marketing-sensitive than they are price-sensitive. There are sales in many other places but for whatever reason they don't get as much public exposure as the Steam sales. Even th
142.
by spacelizard 14y ago
Is someone really a GNU/Linux user if they have no respect for the core values of the system? I personally don't understand the exuberance on reddit. It's just another package manager in the already large sea of them, and a proprietary DRMe
143.
by spacelizard 14y ago
I would not consider GNU/Linux users the target market either. I would consider the target market to be Windows users that don't want to use Windows for whatever reason. These people don't care what they use as long as it isn't Windows, the
144.
by spacelizard 14y ago
It wouldn't be unrealistic to expect distro support if these were free software packages that distros could patch and package up for their own needs. But they aren't, they are proprietary blobs distributed through a proprietary app store th
145.
by spacelizard 14y ago
> SteamBox is going to be basically the same story only at a $200-300 price point Where are you getting these prices? >and with $5-20 games. Steam regularly sells games at $50+. I really doubt this is going to change any time soon.
146.
by spacelizard 14y ago
Why would GNU/Linux users pay to use proprietary software? As long as these games are proprietary, they will only see adoption among recent Windows converts who want the same experience. What's the point? I mean I get it that Windows 8 is b
147.
by spacelizard 14y ago
I still have only used sublime text once, but I might try it out again soon just to get a better idea of what these features are that make it so much better. And them I'm going to add them into vim. I think that it is a serious problem that