Remix.run Logo
cryo32 6 hours ago

No we won’t. We’ll make grand statements about it, leave it for commercial entities to corrupt it, then complain loudly about the state of it when we really did nothing about it.

I expect we’ve got a future of “undo forks” as I’ve called them which is rolling back to pre-insanity times and rethinking again. That’s only something people unencumbered by commercial requirements can do.

noufalibrahim 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

In a certain way, moving from "Free Software" to "Open Source" started this transition and it's not slowing down.

p-e-w 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Imagine if the AGPL had become the default license for open source projects, as it was intended to when the service provider loophole in the GPL became apparent. The software industry would be unrecognizable.

Instead, millions of developers now gift corporations their work by releasing everything under MIT or Apache, and those corporations take from that treasure trove what they want and give back what they want, which is very often nothing.

999900000999 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Some projects , like Godot are MIT so contributors can use it for their own commercial projects.

Occasionally, EA for example, a big corp will donate some money to. Apple has created PRS to add support for Vision Pro.

If Godot was GPL it would be useless for most commercial game devs.

shimman 9 minutes ago | parent [-]

You are absolutely allowed to use GPL software in commercial products, why are you deliberately lying or misleading?

GitHub could only exist because it was built on top of git, which is also GPL licensed. This is not the only example but should be the immediate one since nearly a vast majority of devs touch git on a daily basis.

Maybe stop listening to your legal team and actually think for a moment. GPL doesn't prevent commercialization, what it does is make sure everyone contributes to the same project equally. Shocker, corporations do not want to contribute to the common good they want to rat fuck it into submission for profit.

bayindirh 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I believe Open Source software sold developers the dream of "to be hired for what they have developed" and cash-in the effort they have spent as a future, stable employment.

Many die on the hill of "developing something required for free with permissive licenses for recognition which will help with their future endeavors", which is the same with other creative lines of work. As a result they are milked of their knowledge and forced to bear the burden of leading the project and handling the community while companies just use what's developed while quietly but strongly nudging the project's direction for their benefit.

If the developer gets rogue, the thing is forked and sometimes closed down with no downside to the company, but the community and the developer(s) are hung to dry, conveniently signaling other developers about what they might face if they disobey their overlords with iron fists in velvet gloves as a secondary effect.

trumpdong 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I think you can get recognition just as well with share-alike licenses. Plus you leave the opportunity open to ask for money for a different license grant.

bayindirh 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I believe strongly so, however companies doesn't like this, hence the current state we're in. Also it's part of the "advertising" done by the companies.

Last but not the least, many people are very ill-informed about GPL and how it works. I experience this when we discuss this with peers.

This is why I only use copyleft (or non-commercial/share-alike) licenses on what I build/produce/put out.

limagnolia 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If you share your code with me under a copy left license, I will share my contributions under the same copy left license... you will not then be free to ask for money for things built on top of or with my contributions. You may be okay with that, but it is a decision you have to make.

kruffalon 35 minutes ago | parent [-]

A common misunderstanding with the GPL and other copy left licences is that they care about money and monetary transactions.

They mostly do not.

They only demand that you offer the source code to anyone that asks for it if you also distribute any kind of executable (you may even charge to cover the costs of the distribution).

The AGPL expands this to SaaS's too to close that loophole.

hacker_homie 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

warumdarum 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Its worse. Open source will be hijacked by hype warfare companies to extract free labour and build the things they want instead of the things we want.

trumpdong 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

But that's already what open source is...

forgetfreeman 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Oh that ship sailed over a decade ago. Industry appeasement is a big part of what killed Drupal.

bonzini 3 hours ago | parent [-]

What killed Drupal, and what replaced it? WordPress?

limagnolia 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The Drupal Association and its mismanagement of the community? I don't know how dead Drupal is, but I used to actively use and promote it and I have long since moved on, due in part to the Drupal Associations shenanigans.

forgetfreeman an hour ago | parent [-]

I glanced at D.O the other day and was depressed to find they're reporting 400k active installs. I remember when that was 16M and growing. We're talking a loss of 97.5% of active sites. I'm betting the few that remain are mostly small government and nonprofit websites that haven't managed to put together the budget for a migration away from the platform. So yeah pretty dead. And yeah I blame the Drupal Association by way of Aquia and Microsoft. I left the project with a clear conscience after explaining in detail to an entire roomful of core developers that objectifying the codebase a la Laravel would kill the project stone dead within 5 years. Predictably they offered the typical "community developers are bad and don't want to learn" sneer as their primary defense of the decision. RIP.

bborud 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

But surely the death of any large chunk of PHP leaving the stage is cause for applause and boisterous shouts of joy?

forgetfreeman an hour ago | parent [-]

Having coded back end projects in PHP, Perl, Python, and Node idk wtf folks who make comments like this are on about. Node took all of the worst aspects of JavaScript and spread them to back end development. Someone should have ended up on trial in the Hague for that particular crime against humanity and PHP is what you're grumbling about? Seriously?

abc123abc123 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Note that the LF of today is basically just like any other global corporation with its own political agenda. You can just follow the money, and see that it is controlled by corporations. They neutered Torvalds, are very woke, and generally a nightmare to work with.

I always advice aspiring open source enthusiasts to stay far, far away from the Linux Foundation. It has become a barrier to software freedom these days, rather than an enabler.

Forgeties79 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Idk I swapped to a Linux-only PC last April and have been steadily shifting over to open source software for basically everything in my life. I haven’t done everything, I doubt I ever will hit 100%, but well over half the stuff I use on a daily basis I have real control over now and can audit.

Keep in mind I am not a coder/engineer, I’m just kind of a tourist in that world, so if I can do it it’s clearly very achievable for many people.

No reason to throw up your hands in defeat. We don’t need everyone to shift over everything. We just need to make sure there’s always space and demand for open source software to keep it alive.

necrotic_comp 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

One of the reasons why a source-based system like Gentoo is particularly nice is that you can compile your binaries with debug flags, so if you hit bad behavior you can inspect, write a patch, compile into your running system, and then push the same patch upstream.

I barely have to do it, but imho, this is how software should work and what running a computer should feel like.

ligne 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's worth noting that even more staid distributions like Debian provide you with the means to do this. It's arguably bit more complicated, but saves you a lot of time and hassle on the happy path.

skydhash 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I use OpenBSD and it’s actually the same thing with the additional niceties of binary packages. A bug or an issue with any program (including the kernel and drivers)? Patch and rebuild.

cryo32 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm doing exactly the same but you really don't have as much control as you may wish. I mean look at Freedesktop which is basically Redhat staff. The biggest Kernel contributor in SLOC a while back was MSFT.

Gnome and Systemd is a fine example of how fucked up this can get.

Forgeties79 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I’m on bazzite which isn’t perfect but it’s lightyears ahead of windows.

You can always find bad examples. The good news is there’s still lots of good ones out there right now. No point in being defeatist about it, just do what you can

latexr 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> I have real control over now and can audit.

> Keep in mind I am not a coder/engineer

How do you control and audit something you don’t understand? What specific steps are you taking?

Forgeties79 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I depend on the community tbh. Poor phrasing, it implies I personally audit it. But ultimately if I want to I can and I know plenty of folks scour repos/compile code themselves, so if something is wrong it’ll likely come out. It’s open source, they can’t hide it from people who are looking. Also I’m not entirely ignorant - I can sometimes see when something is up, I am comfortable using a CLI, I know my way around a computer better than most.

Wouldn’t you say that’s way better than the status quo with windows/macOS?

4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
eastbound 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Commercial entities are 95% of useful open-source (Linux, Postgres and similar — excluding leftstr-type of utilities).

tetris11 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Commercial entities latch onto useful open-source because it is a successful product they simply cannot compete with.

jackdoe 5 hours ago | parent [-]

why would they compete with it when its open?

rectang 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

To secure network effects for themselves. This is one of the reasons the ASF was founded.

https://httpd.apache.org/ABOUT_APACHE.html

> We realize that it is often seen as an economic advantage for one company to "own" a market - in the software industry, that means to control tightly a particular conduit such that all others must pay for its use. This is typically done by "owning" the protocols through which companies conduct business, at the expense of all those other companies. To the extent that the protocols of the World Wide Web remain "unowned" by a single company, the Web will remain a level playing field for companies large and small. Thus, "ownership" of the protocols must be prevented.

dspillett 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

They wouldn't. But the GPP seemed to be implying that we should be grateful to commercial entities for the existence of those useful open projects, when in fact if the commercial entities had their preferred way the projects would not be (as) open.

LtWorf 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Debian, KDE…

fithisux 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Spot on!!!

pydry 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Defeatism is easy

dspillett 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Which is a large part of why what cryo32 said will come to pass.

doginasuit 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Acknowledging the result of defeatism should push us toward a different mindset, not more defeatism. Over the long run, humanity has a pretty good record, carried by the people who refuse to give up.

AnthonyMouse 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Only if people succumb to defeatism. There have been documented instances of that not happening.

fg137 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Commenting on an Internet forum is what's easy.

chrinic7294 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Defeatism is easy

I prefer easy.

If you prefer difficult, more power to you.

AnthonyMouse 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's the same easy as falling out of a plane without a parachute. Gravity will do all the work but you'll not like what happens at the bottom.

doublerabbit 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Isn't it easier just not to board the plane, who really enjoys being at an airport?

AnthonyMouse 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You were never at an airport. You fell asleep in your bed and woke up on the plane. Fighting the people taking you somewhere you don't want to go is definitely more work than falling out of the plane. It just has a specific advantage.

latexr 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> who really enjoys being at an airport?

Not every airport is a huge commercial building with hundreds of people (also, you wouldn’t visit one of those to parachute jump). Some are akin to cozy shacks without a lot of traffic where you’re in and out in no time.

latexr 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> I prefer easy.

Clearly you don’t feel that strongly about it. You know what would’ve been easier than making an account just to post that comment? Not doing that.

Have you also stopped working, paying your bills, showering, eating, interacting with other people? Not doing any of that is easier than doing it.

p-e-w 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Do you have any concrete plan to make things better that doesn’t involve magical thinking or pseudo-appeals like “everyone just needs to…”?

doublerabbit 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

So is taking without giving back.