> they choose MIT (to further adoption by other existing distributions and allow other developers to reuse pieces) and how it is being used (to build cheap distributions on it slapping a different name on front)

The former and latter are nearly equivalent to both licenses AND everyone can still make cheap distributions with a different name slapped on top.

They only chose GPL because Omarchy is MIT and they _hate_ Omarchy.

> Frankly, I'm not sure if permissive licenses have a future. No one wants dev marketeer to save tokens reusing their work.

On the contrary, the AI shift means that devs who are concerned about enforcing the purity of their community and stymieing marketeers will be vastly outnumbered by people who just want to “move fast and fix things” (which is essentially what Omarchy represents)

> and they _hate_ Omarchy.

Could be, reading what their fanboys write on X they could have more than a few reasons. In addition to details I'm not aware of related to how the fork has been developed.

> and stymieing marketeers will be vastly outnumbered by people who just want to “move fast and fix things”

These can be easily conflated in a single category of people, I don't see why the first group should not be able to keep prompting a model for days or months. Or did we already invent the definition of Real Prompter like someone did for Real Programmers?