Adrian Kuschelyagi Malacoda, free software enthusiast and GNU respector

Pronouns: any

  • 12 Posts
  • 177 Comments
Joined 2Y ago
cake
Cake day: Jun 30, 2020

help-circle
rss

Trademark is an entirely different issue from copyright and it’s my understanding that the trademark was the only legal avenue of attack he had against LibreSignal. Other forks of Signal such as Molly avoid using Signal’s trademark for that reason


I’m talking about actually blocking forks/third party clients on a technological level, not ToS or demands in github tickets. As far as I am aware he does not have that ability.

According to their readme the fork called Molly uses Signal’s servers. Can he block Molly from using Signal’s servers? Has he tried to?


Signal is free software, he can’t technologically or legally stop forks or third party clients. All he can realistically do is complain about them




True, but wasting all that space and cardboard is still fairly asshole



Free Software is, and has been for the last 40 years, about the “four freedoms.” Those four freedoms are no less important today then they were back then. Copyleft was about ensuring every user had those four freedoms. It wasn’t really about “forcing companies to give back” and it certainly wasn’t supposed to provide an exclusive right to monetize “your product.”

I think the author of this article has a few legitimate points (it is horrid how open source maintainers are treated by proprietary software developers who feel entitled to free labor, not just the log4j maintainers but e.g. the core-js maintainer) and some shaky arguments (if anything, Audacity being free software was a good thing because it allowed Tenacity to happen; and while it’s obviously bad that TikTok infringed on OBS’s copyrights and violated the GPL, it doesn’t really negate the good that OBS does for the free software community). I also would not refer to copyright infringement as stealing, even when it involves free software; this is the sort of language that intellectual property advocates use to suggest that making a copy of something is equivalent to actually stealing a thing (e.g. “You wouldn’t steal a car”).

He’s also right about one other thing: I, and some others, would definitely refuse to use his product if it’s proprietary; but I’m not sure I would have used it regardless.


Fosscord aims to be compatible with Discord which is why I think it has an edge over Revolt. It will be possible to use Fosscord client as a free alternative to the proprietary Discord client while in the process of switching over to a self-hosted instance.


Perceptive readers might have noticed that most of these arguments can be generalized. This article is much the same if we replace “Discord” with “GitHub”, for instance, or “Twitter” or “YouTube”. If your project depends on proprietary infrastructure, I want you to have a serious discussion with your collaborators about why. What do your choices mean for the long-term success of your project and the ecosystem in which it resides? Are you making smart investments, or just using tools which are popular or that you’re already used to?


Perceptive readers might have noticed that most of these arguments can be generalized. This article is much the same if we replace “Discord” with “GitHub”, for instance, or “Twitter” or “YouTube”. If your project depends on proprietary infrastructure, I want you to have a serious discussion with your collaborators about why. What do your choices mean for the long-term success of your project and the ecosystem in which it resides? Are you making smart investments, or just using tools which are popular or that you’re already used to?




I have been a supporting member of the Trisquel GNU/Linux project for about ten years now. To date I have contributed €903.00 to the project.


People trust Apple with anything?


I used Trisquel from 2010 to 2014. It worked well enough for me. I switched to Debian because I wanted more up-to-date packages and Trisquel had switched to an LTS-only release cycle. I still have Trisquel on a server.


This, so much of what’s wrong with reddit is the obsession with making internet number go up.



It seems to be working out well for the “Linux gaming” people. Like I said, though, I’m not really concerned with the support of proprietary software on “Linux” or with the idea of the “universal platform” of “Linux.” The farther we move away from the idea of “Linux” being a “platform” the better.

See also Let distributions do their job (Drew DeVault); note that the package manager I am using (GNU Guix) aims to make it easy to package different types of libre software projects using “importers” and it’s also possible to build packages directly from a specific git commit or reference.


There isn’t a meaning behind it. It’s not my real name, it’s a pen name. I like the way it sounds.


Fragmentation isn’t real. The best way for developers to “support Linux” is to publish their source code and make it easy for users and distributions to build it. If it’s proprietary then that’s their problem, I’m not concerned with proprietary software.

ed: For proprietary software, as silly as it may sound, the best approach to supporting “Linux” seems to be supporting Windows and then waiting for Valve/the community to support it using Wine/Proton.


According to the FSF Haiku is not fully libre. Non-free firmware blobs are kind of expected in 2021, but they also claim it includes non-free userland software.


I think Stallman is misunderstood and his contributions to technology are misunderstood and often understated. In my view, he is one of the most - if not the most - influential figures in technology in the last 40 years. The GNU Project and the GPL are directly responsible for what uninformed people variously refer to as “Linux” or “open source.” Stallman is criticized as being pedantic or stubborn in insisting on certain terms, but this is actually not uncommon especially in the realm of business and politics (political and government leaders strongly insist you use the correct term for their party) and there is a reason for this; indeed, I think there is a direct correlation to the general misunderstanding of Stallman and the widespread usage of terminology which erases his philosophy and contributions.

At the same time, in the last few years I have come to believe Stallman is seriously flawed as a leader and a spokesperson. In 2018, for example, he insisted on including a joke referring to the “global gag rule” in the documentation for abort() in glibc. This joke was widely criticized for various reasons, such as its inappropriateness in a technical manual, its US-centricism, its effect in creating an unwelcoming atmosphere, and so on. The discussion was moved to a private mailing list, but my understanding was that Stallman pulled rank as “Chief GNUisance” to insist that the joke remain in the manual, despite community objections.

Stallman’s “eccentric” behavior has been previously noted, and seems to do more harm than good. I’ve read reports that he has contributed to an unwelcoming environment particularly for women, both off and online, and I have no reason to doubt those reports. It is telling that many of those reports came from people who worked at FSF or in the GNU project for/with him. Those have more credence than “open source” people or random internet anons slinging shit.

More generally, a fundamental flaw of Stallman’s in my opinion is that he often seems to form opinions on matters that do not concern him and without consulting relevant communities, often running counter to the widely accepted opinion in those communities. Most controversial is his article against singular they/them (which, to my knowledge, runs counter not only to consensus in the trans and non-binary communities but also to generally accepted linguistic practice overall) but he shows this tendency elsewhere for example when he argues that “piracy” is a smear term (which was technically true at some point - but this term has long since been “reclaimed” (for lack of a better word) by the data sharing community, a fact he does not even seem to mention). His anti-glossary is full of more examples.

It’s entirely possible that Stallman is a brilliant thinker and hacker, but a poor leader and spokesman. I wouldn’t consider myself an effective leader either. I still greatly respect Stallman, his philosophy, and his work. I no longer “hero worship” him as I did a decade or even 5 years ago.





Rust Foundation Trademark Policy Issue

Summary of the issues related to the Rust trademark policy with regards to GNU/Linux distributions specifically…


Lemmy

This one’s obvious to us all but I think it’s fitting. …