»those freedoms don't actually mean shit to the average end user. only programmers care if they have access to the source code, and most people aren't programmers. and i am a programmer, and i don't give a shit.«

@simulo those freedoms mean something to some people, and people to whom it doesn't mean f*** (like the blog author) are immaterial - if she/he were talking about the law, she'd/he'd be saying "the law means f*** to everybody (i.e. me extrapolated) because everybody hasn't filed a suit in court".

An example comes to mind: Con Kolivas improved the desktop performance of Linux by tweaking the kernel scheduler, and he apparently is a dentist!

1/2

Follow

@simulo he is also inaccurate (disingenious?) in using Linux as a free-s/w that rejected GPLv3 - Linux happens to use GPLv2, but is open source! It is unique in open source in having got corporates hooked into it, unlike the BSD Unices - Apple wouldn't have paid BSD developers their due for the kernel it based OS X on, but Redhat et al pay Linux devs - I don't know if that is just down to the GPL!

And free software licenses may yet have some role to play in prohibiting Copilot ...

Sign in to participate in the conversation
CleverLibre Social

CleverLibre Social is an inclusive social instance for open discussion, learning, and community.
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.