woofie11

55 ms·

451.
by woofie11 6y ago
The mess here is a bit deeper than that: * PPRA gives us rights to inspect school curricula. We can't, since they're locked up at Pearson. * FEPRA gives us rights to inspect and correct student records. We can't, since they&#
452.
by woofie11 6y ago
Code reviews miss things. (1) Code is in part a communication medium. This says "We use MD5" (2) Code changes. If some sees something cryptohashed, they may use it differently in 5 years.
453.
by woofie11 6y ago
Years of GPL enforcement don't show this to be the case. In either case, the outcome is damages. If I've contributed 5 lines of code to an AGPL program, damages to me are peanuts. If Google makes a reasonable settlement offer, and
454.
by woofie11 6y ago
If you don't mind losing your phone number forever, Google Fi is a great option! If Google Pay suspects fraud, it locks your account. Google Fi isn't paid for. Google locks your phone number from being ported out forever. Empowere
455.
by woofie11 6y ago
Indeed. It's hard to go back and argue a different interpretation later in court, if the intended interpretation is so clearly stated and defined.
456.
by woofie11 6y ago
That has not been my experience with woke academics. They're glad to lecture, but debate stops as soon as they meet someone who can stand up to them and argue back with a similar level of rhetorical prowess and expertise. They'll
457.
by woofie11 6y ago
You did demonstrate that, and with all the coherency of an anti-vax flat earther. And just when I thought my opinion of Google couldn't go lower....
458.
by woofie11 6y ago
I won't bother correcting legal technical errors in what you wrote, since you don't seem to care, and since I don't get paid to educate strangers on the Internet, but I will once again point out your shifting goalposts: I nev
459.
by woofie11 6y ago
> Can you explain to me how I'd import proprietary software into google's source code repository? You grab a .dll file with a library you like, or a .so, and you commit it into git. Voila! This happens all the time. > The co
460.
by woofie11 6y ago
> Consider the values: We link AGPL software and there's an x% chance we have to spend 10 billion dollars in litigation, engineering effort, and fines to keep our stuff closed source. At what value of X do you make this rule? That X
461.
by woofie11 6y ago
Google's page has toxic and false anti-AGPL FUD like this: "This viral effect requires that the complete corresponding source code of the product or service be released to the world under the AGPL license. This is triggered if the
462.
by woofie11 6y ago
In that case, your post was a complete non sequitur. Drew is responding to this aggressive and misleading Google page: https://opensource.google/docs/using/agpl-policy/ He is not responding to a random post f
463.
by woofie11 6y ago
I'm not saying everything done is open source. I'm saying it's less common in regulated industries. NDA / sensitive government work -> FOIA makes restrictions tough. I can request government source code. Trade secrets
464.
by woofie11 6y ago
> downside risk is monumentally huge for a company like Google if the ruling goes against them The downside risk is damages. Those usually aren't monumentally huge. There's a calculation, but they're based on how much dama
465.
by woofie11 6y ago
I did not realize that. I read the one link. That's all I know about Daniel. He sounded reasonable there and what he wrote made sense. There are quite a few logical leaps between: 1) Daniel writing a reasonable post on HN 2) Daniel bei
466.
by woofie11 6y ago
I won't go into personal specifics, but I'm mid-career. I've been through a few companies, and made it as high up as C-suite in a smaller company, and director-level in a bigger company, before finding I prefer senior IC, tec
467.
by woofie11 6y ago
I've worked in several of those industries. Oddly enough, open source was always easier there. I'd challenge you to find a regulation which prevents open source in any of those industries. I think the one exception -- and this was
468.
by woofie11 6y ago
It's a little more complex than that. The intent of the parties /drafting/ the contract do matter. Public writings clarifying the intent do as well.
469.
by woofie11 6y ago
I don't think Daniel contradicts Eben, at least in the link here... There are good rationales and bad rationales for a decision. Google made a good decision with a bad rationale. Daniel made a good decision with a good rationale. Why d
470.
by woofie11 6y ago
> It sounds like you agree that companies with proprietary code can't link GPL libraries No. This is incorrect. One cannot create derivative works with AGPL code. Linking does not necessarily create a derivative work. Whether or not
471.
by woofie11 6y ago
Then listen to Eben Moglen, who wrote it, and is a brilliant law professor at Columbia :)
472.
by woofie11 6y ago
Yeah, it's complex: * The article is right that Google IS spreading FUD. They're making legal statements which are probably false to minimize usage of the AGPL outside of Google. * Google came to a sensible conclusion, that THEY s
473.
by woofie11 6y ago
Eben Moglen wrote the AGPL. There's a standard process courts use to figure this stuff out. Intent fits into it. Eben Moglen clearly states what he meant in many talks. Courts favor intended interpretation of a contract. That makes th
474.
by woofie11 6y ago
AGPL software isn't designed to be used as a dependency to a proprietary system. It's designed to be used in an open ecosystem. That's kind of the point. * If you expect your code to be used as a dependency to a proprietary s
475.
by woofie11 6y ago
It's neither more nor less practical in general. It's less practical for your company. It depends on what you're trying to accomplish. If your goal is to build a low-friction library for others to adopt (e.g. JQuery), it&#x27
476.
by woofie11 6y ago
Eben Moglen talks about this at length (author of the license). The rough lines are drawn as per how closely the works couple and interdepend on each other. For example, if I build an extension which works with Chrome and Firefox, over a we
477.
by woofie11 6y ago
Awesome article! I was in an organization which had an AGPL ban. After a couple of months with lawyers, it's now a major AGPL supporter. AGPL lets you build ecosystems around your software, where everyone contributes, and no one can pa
478.
by woofie11 6y ago
I've worked with two types of older engineers: 1) Ones who keep up their skills 2) Ones who don't The former are a treasure trove of knowledge and skills, and provide substantially more value than anyone junior ever could. Going t
479.
by woofie11 6y ago
That's the damnable thing. The result in each case is an NDA. These things never go public. It's in no one's interest. MIT is choked full with people who've signed these sorts of NDAs. You shall not talk about wide-sprea
480.
by woofie11 6y ago
The bigger problem is that research fraud leads to research impact which leads to academic hiring. I think most graduate students come in with pretty good integrity. By the time people are promoted for tenure, you've had multiple filte

More ›