Nylige søk
Alternativer for søk
Watching a video that makes a bad case against #uutils - so here I go.
I don't care if you run #commercial #software like #videogames and #musicsoftware , because certain software is so huge and complex that it requires return on investment.
There's also something to be said for #MIT and #BSD licenses in general software, #CC even.
But when it comes to the fundamental software you run, like kernel or essential userland commands, it's gotta be #GPL - if not some other #copyleft license. Why?
#Copyleft means "power to the user". That is certain expectations are #legally expected of companies and organizations that partake in the code, and those expectations are levied in the users interests.
That is you are expected to contribute back improvements and not put them behind a paywall. This makes #copyleft is anti #freemium by default.
There are plenty of companies that try to slip one by, but in the fundamental software that's in all of our computers? That's historically a bad idea.
The first time #Ubuntu really rubbed me the wrong way wasn't #snap, but #mir.
Back back in the days, when Jesus rode dinosaurs into Jerusalem, there was still a dispute about which new standard was going to be adopted.
#Wayland was in planning stage then and Canonical was fighting against it for no other reason than "not invented here".
There I was, with an union tired around my belt, seeing that the license was #GPL - with an agreement that #Canonical could "relicense" your code... wat?!
Now #uutil is going to replace #coreutils ? Not trusting that one bit.
The core utilities of any given #operatingsystem, as well as the kernel, display protocol, etc, etc, etc should NEVER be up to #liberal #licensing like #MIT or #BSD.
For total power to the user, the fundamental technological stack should be #copyleft, because we should have #legal expectations towards vendors.
This is also from the system that brought you #snaps. #canonical wants a #walledgarden and it shows.