For all his great work on Linux (and git and others) Torvalds was never into activism so much. He declined GPLv3 (yes it would be impossible to get all contributors to sign for it). He’s always been an “open source pragmatist”, which is fine I guess. And I really respect his work. But at these important political points, we need someone like Stallman who has consistently proven to be on the right side of the debate
This. Google would not be fucking us with Play Integrity and other DRM craps if Linus made the kernel GPLv3 licensed. It would have been a dreamland to have hackable phones, TVs and a whole lot of IoT devices where the users would be controlling them instead of other way around.
If they’re gonna make proprietary black boxes of spying, I’d rather they spend their own money for it rather than using the code created by the selfless FOSS contributors, ngl.
Just because fascism-lovers desire a dystopia doesn’t mean we have to make it easy for them.
You seem to have a very idealized idea of how selfless this whole thing is. Google has sponsored a lot of work in the kernel, so have multiple corporations over the years. This is not some puppies and raibows shit here.
It just happens to work really well because the license and multiple interest of a good kernel do just that: a good kernel.
Surveillance issues and too strong corporations are an issue with your government, not the kernel
I’m not absolving governments at all so I’m not quite antithetical to this position either. I understand that a GPL license might have meant less corporate incentives but I also do despise how most corporations are moving these days so it is what it is I guess.
For all his great work on Linux (and git and others) Torvalds was never into activism so much. He declined GPLv3 (yes it would be impossible to get all contributors to sign for it). He’s always been an “open source pragmatist”, which is fine I guess. And I really respect his work. But at these important political points, we need someone like Stallman who has consistently proven to be on the right side of the debate
This. Google would not be fucking us with Play Integrity and other DRM craps if Linus made the kernel GPLv3 licensed. It would have been a dreamland to have hackable phones, TVs and a whole lot of IoT devices where the users would be controlling them instead of other way around.
Nah, they just would have either used something else, or fucked us with some other way. The kernel license just allowed them to do it like this.
If they’re gonna make proprietary black boxes of spying, I’d rather they spend their own money for it rather than using the code created by the selfless FOSS contributors, ngl.
Just because fascism-lovers desire a dystopia doesn’t mean we have to make it easy for them.
You seem to have a very idealized idea of how selfless this whole thing is. Google has sponsored a lot of work in the kernel, so have multiple corporations over the years. This is not some puppies and raibows shit here.
It just happens to work really well because the license and multiple interest of a good kernel do just that: a good kernel.
Surveillance issues and too strong corporations are an issue with your government, not the kernel
I’m not absolving governments at all so I’m not quite antithetical to this position either. I understand that a GPL license might have meant less corporate incentives but I also do despise how most corporations are moving these days so it is what it is I guess.