Brutkey

SuperDicq
@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo

@cnx@awkward.place Because the actual libraries are free software.

I think when it comes to things like software which interfaces with proprietary network services the Free System Distribution Guidelines does not specifically disallow it, meaning that inclusion of these libraries is technically speaking not against the FSDG.

zaire arcana
@zaire@fedi.absturztau.be

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @cnx@awkward.place they’re free software under the same definition of free software that is violated when you forbid genocidal fascists from using your code

the FSF has no sense of ethics


SuperDicq
@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo

@zaire@fedi.absturztau.be @cnx@awkward.place People who commit genocide should be in jail without access to a computer in the first place, they should never touch software.

The FSF doesn't allow these so called "ethical source" licences, not because they think that genocide is good, but because these licenses are extremely dumb and counteracting to the free software movement goals.

All that these licenses do is muddy the legal text with additional clauses that are extremely vague and completely unenforceable through copyright law in the first place.

Copyright law is absolutely the wrong tool for the job here. We have many other systems that are supposed to stop genocide. If these can not even stop genocide do you think a copyright license will make a difference? Of course not.

The only thing than can happen is that a judge will say that the license is invalid, which is obviously bad for free software.

I also highly disagree with the statement "FSF has no sense of ethics". It's just you who clearly misses the point.

Also you should honestly see the irony with your own statement about "free software" when it contains "when you forbid" and "your code".

We don't take ownership of software running on other people's computers and we definitely don't forbid things. That's the opposite of what the free software movement is about.

zaire arcana
@zaire@fedi.absturztau.be

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @cnx@awkward.place is the clown reaction enough or do i need to laugh you out the room too

SuperDicq
@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo

@zaire@fedi.absturztau.be @cnx@awkward.place Also it's not just the FSF. Literally everybody thinks this is stupid.

The Debian Free Software Definition does. The Open Source Initiative does as well. Literally everybody disagrees with you, not just the FSF.

moth bitch
@kebokyo@plush.city
re: very silly FOSS discourse; global pol

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @cnx@awkward.place @zaire@fedi.absturztau.be β€œliterally everybody” is literally inaccurate because I am a part of β€œeverybody” and I believe in the β€œparadox of tolerance” model of FOSS: if malicious people or organizations use FOSS software, the developers of said software should have the right to claim sovereignty over their software and revoke the malicious users’ licenses.