Anti GPL Thread

Good goy, free software is ebil. Use our proprietary software instead.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Free_software_companies

This is anti-GPL, not anti free software. BSD license for example is very business friendly

Yes, goy, give up your work for others like (((Apple))) to use for free. Don't ask for anything in return, like patches and code.

BSD is a license for cucks.

...

Actually, corporations tend to give back since they want the upstream to have the improvements they make so they can use it again. Much better than that kike (((Richard Stallman))) who's biggest contribution is eating gunk off his toe.

Yes, let's hope they do that. By the way, where's the source for OSX? Oh, that doesn't exist? I wonder why. Could it be because they give you scraps in exchange for your meal?

RMS started the free software movement, has basically made modern free software possible and wrote fucking emacs before you were a twinkle in your daddy's eye. He is a Jew like Jesus was a Jew.

Emacs is bloated garbage. Besides, (((stallman))) hasn't written anything in years.

Emacs is the best text editor if you're not a huge cocksucking vi faggot.

And? I think laying the foundation to a world-wide movement is much more than you've ever done or are likely to do with your pathetic life.

Yes, the cuck voting for (((bernie sanders))) is the man we should listen to. Get a job you filthy parasitic hippy.

What you've just done is called an ad hominem. You can't win the argument by attacking the GPL, so you attack RMS. Get out, kike.

You get out kike, I'm voting for trump.

And you can do that while still using the GPL. Or does voting for Trump mean you have to suck corporate cock?

And yes, voting habits and political leanings are important. Ignoring them is how SJWs have invaded.

The BSD licenses, MIT, WTFPL, or public domain. What is there to discuss?

Not when it comes to the GPL. I wouldn't stop using a tool just because it was designed by an SJW if that tool is good. The GPL is a good tool to maintain freedom.

See

Also, go read stallmans website. The degenerate fully supports pedophilia and necrophilia and beastiality.

Cuck

This is called cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Yes, and? Where do you think you are?

Says the man that wants his code taken with no strings attached.

You're willing to use SJW software and said SJWs are no big deal. You're not just a cuck, you're a faggot. Go back to Holla Forums queer.

I use the best tool that respects my freedom. SJWs don't actually code anyway, so it doesn't affect me. Are they going to insert SJW shit in the code? How would they go about doing this?

Nice insults, but you still haven't told me how I'm a cuck. You're the one that wants to use licenses that do not preserve user freedom or ensure that those that use your work give back.

I think those that are willing to give up work for no reward, even code, are much more likely to be cucks than those that demand you give back if you use their work.

The thing about GPL is that we do expect to be paid. We expect to be paid in code. BSD/MIT and other such licenses do not expect anything in return. If that isn't the behavior of cucks, I don't know what is.

SJWs always force their politics into software and onto others. Never compromise with a SJW, never.

You still haven't said how that matters to code. You don't have to associate with SJWs.

Look at Mozilla if you want an example of SJW infestation.

This thread itself is a good example.

Go back to slurping Microsoft's Win10EULA cock.

ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS Holla Forums, A SHILL, OR A JEW

It isn't, but there are vast problems with intellectual property that are not easy to solve and that may be unsolvable.
It would be nice if content creators would always get a just reward, but at the same time we shouldn't punish people who had the same idea, or who want to build upon an existing one. IP in its current form has to go, there is just no way around it.

So? Stallman is not revered for his degeneracy, but for his advocacy of free software. I don't have to agree with Richard Stallman on everything to recognize his contributions to the free software movement.

Listen, Satan. We know who Richard Stallman is. You are not breaking news here.
We don't care that he is a marxist cuckold and a Sandberg supporter, because his political views don't interfere with his free software crusade.

Again, what part of the code is SJW? Can you point to an SJW data structure or algorithm in any of their projects?

Such as the fact that there is no such thing. You can't own ideas.

Well, if you never tell anyone about them, you basically own them.

No, that's how you kill an idea.

Considering that proprietary software relies on copyright enforcement, which is entirely carried out and paid for by the government, it seems to be much more communist to me.

Why does that even matter?
A "free market" copyright system would not be an improvement if it implements the same copyright and patent policies.

...

You probably mean another false flag thread. Nobody or almost is that retarded, and this is an obvious bait or D&C thread.

There's a tech thread on pol. Let's hope these new migrants don't cause any trouble.

Can someone please explain to me what the problem with the GPL is? From what I get it forbids people from grabbing the source, making changes and then releasing the modified source without making the changes public. That's how Transgaming was able to grab the source code of Wine, make Cider and not give back the improvements. That's why Wine ended up switching to the GPL afterwards.

I can understand if someone doesn't want someone else to just grab the source, make a few changes and then pretend it's all theirs. Or make a small wrapper around it and sell it as their own thing. If you are OK with that you can use a permissive license, or sell an exception license.

Well, you mentioned it. The problemis that GPL makes monetization impossible and that makes it difficult to use it as the basis for a business project. You are stuck with volunteers, amateur programmers, which is fine for many projects, but for more difficult and complex ones it is not.

Nigger it already has, there have been and are companies that sell physical copies of free software on.

Except we have plenty of companies that make money from support and custom code. Programmers should be paid for their work, not for copies. This also makes it so that idea guys don't take all the money and credit.

I agree, but GPL restricts their ability to work on existing code published under the Gnu Public License.

RIght. There's one business model that does not involve code improvements.

You were likely born after the switch to GPL from BSD and don't remember the self-destructive meltdown that occurred due to the BSD license. We should have written a song about it or something to keep it in the culture as history will repeat.

No, it only stops them from locking that code up. If you get hired to edit some code or to add functionality, then you've already been paid. No need to lock up source or make other restrictions.

about:robots serves no purpose other than being a "girls who code™" commit

SJWs forced the CEO to step down because he didn't believe in fag marriage

OK. No government intervention allowed though. You have to stop me from copying you yourself, or pay someone to stop me for you. Good luck turning a profit with your totally original content that doesn't build on millennia of art and research while trying to catch me and thousands of other people.

We already know people who entertain the idea of proprietary software only help contribute to the disastrous network security problem for which Microsoft bravely layed the foundation.

Never mind that after all was said an done, Billy Gates called for more socialism as his old company developed the counting software for the U.S.' polling booths.

Comparing the GPL to communism is so asinine, it can only be a simpleton attempting to make a certain board look bad.

directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:APSLv2.0

No, not really. You can hire professional programmers, sell built binaries and include the code in a tarball for customers along the completely compiled program instead of hosting the code on a public repository. It's all the same as if the program was proprietary, except that the customer has the five freedoms. Most people don't know how to program, or at least not on the level that would be required for maintaining complex software, so even if the code was public they would still be willing to pay you for a compiled binary. If you host your compiled binaries gratis for the public, then that's because you chose to do so.

The GPL is important in that it prevents someone from holding the code hostage. You found a bug? OK, we'll file it on our tracker, maybe someone will bother to look at it in the next five years. If you have the code (and the rights to make changes) you at least have the possibility of fixing it yourself or hiring someone else to do it for you. I have been burned by proprietary shit in the past, software that I had payed money for. If the GPL means it starves these shits out of the industry, then good riddance.

-- Richard Stallman

Swedish guy here with a strong intereste in interracial sex,breeding, black supremacy, white submission. Destruction of the white race through white females breeding with blacks.

Im a strong suporter when it comes to the current generous immigration policy we have here in Sweden and I vote for the Green party that has the most liberal views on immigration. Its great to know that I do my part when it comes to end the white race. Its a conquest that is made by one willing fertile white womb at the time and the weapon is the sperm of black Africans and Arabs, slowly turning Sweden black. I believe that in a century or less the white race here in Sweden is gone, replaced by superior blacks. Check out my blog here on Imagefap.

I have started a new tumblr account after the last one got deleted swedishinterracial.tumblr.com/

check it out.

2016: to late about the blog, tumblr deleted it again.

Regards

Erik S

BSD-style licenses is the non-cucked alternative.

True freedom, do whatever the fuck you want with this code, unlike this pseudo-free GPL crap.

go away anarchist

this post is under ratted
it's capped now

I can understand why people prefer BSD licensing, but can you explain why you're calling "anyone can make my code proprietary" "non-cucked" in particular?

bullshit + it depends how the guy released the code
if it's on the web you can't maximize profit but don't say you can't have money from it if you publish the code only to does who buy it or buy the support then you can still maximize the profits
(don't work on selling software work around it (support))
X $ per month for 1 pc is much more profitable than just buying a license.

No one can make YOUR code proprietary.

Anyone can make HIS OWN CODE proprietary if he wants to.

No one is OBLIGED to do anything.

hahahha
windows use parts of bsd code in it's tcp/ip integration.
fucking the users
anarchist

So? Has the original code disappeared?

No, it publicly available to anyone to use as they see fit.

Microsoft can do with their own version whatever the fuck they want. They cannot do the BSD code proprietary, they don't own the copyright.

If someone is obliged to do something, if the state can use its guns to force someone to do something, then it isn't actually free, is it?

You cannot handle freedom? You want to forbid someone to use your precious code to create something? Fine, put all the restrictions you want and go enjoy your own pseudo-free software, gnucuck.

Running into a bug while working on something is nasty, but free software is not just about bugs. Sometimes users want to change how software does things or extend capabilities of products that they bought, like when RMS wanted to make printer that was far away from user send notification when printing was done.

it was more than sending a notification if I remember
If I remember it was because printing over network was non existent in that time, so he wanted to adapt what they had already done to print over the lan. no ?

wew

Printing over a network was possible. The problem was that the printer was designed for use in a place where there were always people near the printer ready to fix it when it jammed, but in that lab, it could take an hour for someone to pick up what they printed.

The solution was to notify anyone with a pending print job when the printer jammed so they could immediately go and fix it, and found out before they went to pick it up. The new printer software couldn't easily be modified to do that because there was no source code available.

Good point, but I wasn't trying to be exhaustive in my argument.

no but if the original source disappeared, microsoft wouldn't have post it.

indeed, but the users are limited by microsoft.
That is one of the major differences between most of other licenses, even after the integration of anykind of software in other software the gpl still gives to users the wright to change it.

If windows integrated gpl code for the tcp/ip stack they would be obligated to let users change it, if the user wants to.
And by that the users would have freedoms 0 and 1.

Freedom 0 being the freedom to executes the software for any purpose without restriction
and freedom 1 the freedom to study and change the source code so that it can be adapted to your needs.

can you handle dictatorship ?

no, I want to forbid people having to much power over users, with realistic technical measures that can be verified by anyone instead of promises.

thanks for these precision m8
how do you even check if a printer is jammed with software ?

give the definition of stolen ?

tbh it's not a matter of ownership why I'm with gnu, it's because of renting software.
If a developer decided to sell the software, propietary one, but was okay if I reverse-engineered it, or did whatever I wanted with it even if I had no access to the source code, and didn't rent it, instead selling it completely as if it was the CD it's printed on, or a NES cartridge, I'd be okay with it, as long as it didn't phone home, I'd buy it.
Probably just pirate it, though, I can't remember the last time I bought software.

plugged into hipster.js and sold as a service

By that reasoning property at all doesn't exist. How do you *own* a thing. And yet the idea of property is innate in most animals.

Both I and those trips support this notion.

Your containment board:

>>>Holla Forums

Your containment board:

>>>Holla Forums

I think I see a pattern, Chrome on Windows 10 ftw amr? Let's make America great again

Fuck that communist kike Richard Stallman

Get a job you filthy parasitic hippy.

get out

First they infiltrate, then they thoughtshape, then they win.

Don't give Holla Forums an inch.

ok I see the problem here. You've all falling into the mentality of "us vs them"

computers are merely a tool for whatever purpose you give them. Now obviously you won't be using Win10 for doing highly questionable activities but...

Lets say these operating systems are drills

Your boss buys the windows drill in bulk to give his workers. What are you going to do? Quit your job? Yeah good luck, I'm sure you won't be replaced!

The lesson here is, use something if it's useful to you. Don't posture too much over idealogy.

What do you mean with "inconsistent"?

That's the point, a free market wouldn't implement a copyright system because it is inefficient waste of resources; an attempt to make implementations of an idea artificially scarce.

kill your boss

Wow, the doublethink here is just amazing.

I think he's talking about an ideal free market that has never been realized.

Oh DRM would certainly exist, a physical police force that can throw you into prison for copyright infringement would not.

Why is Holla Forums such cancer?

Get back on your own board

You can own a thing because it isn't replicable or discoverable independently, you stupid fucking idiot. Get the dick out of your mouth, it will help you think clearer.

...

wewlad

This isn't Holla Forums, trust me, Holla Forums posters would flood the thread and board with shitposts, its all they're good for, and its not "Holla Forums" anymore, they raid Holla Forums from a different website now

Gee I wonder who is behind this post!

You mean GNU Affero GPL?

Everyone is moving towards SaaS anyway. The best "protection" is not releasing the code in any form.

Is that why they use it in servers and not Windows?
How about you actually use Linux or shutup?

Do you seriously think Holla Forums doesn't divide and conquer boards?

I use the BSD license for projects too small to really care about what happens to them, e.g. irc bots. If I were to write something big and hopefully useful I would consider the GPL.

Sage for not shitposting in a shitposting thread.

Yeah, no. Just the paid thugs to break you kneecaps.

0/10
Free as in libre, not as in gratis you faggit.
I'm paid to write free software, that's what I do for a living. Where does Gobunnism and free labour fit into that equation?

Do you think proprietary software is wrong or not?
If you do, what virtue is there in allowing proprietary derivatives? The GPL is business-friendly, it's just not friendly to businesses built around the unethical practice of subjecting someone else's computer to the whim of your program, other businesses do fine. Guess what, outright proprietary software like Windows is even more business friendly because its source code isn't a leverage for competitors like OSX, whereas Microsoft can have as much BSD source code as Apple has. Why don't you support the most business-friendly alternative, Mr. Corporate Cucksucker?

and so would binary-only programs. there would simply be no punishment for copying 'em around and reverse-engineering.

At this point we need more public support and awareness, programmers... not so much. The bulk of free software will be wasted if more people don't use it, and it will be useless when political changes like patents render it nonfree. I applaud Stallman's vision and leadership.

ok son

how can the anti-GPL crowd so blatantly give that argument given the sheer amount of counterexamples? The economy around GPL software is way bigger; take distros as an example. There's only a handful of BSD operating systems and they barely survive

except I can't you fucking hypocrite.
Daily reminder that the BSDs fuel Sony and Apple's anti-freedom practices.
Congratulations BSD retards, I hope you enjoy your absolute freedom when the anti-freedom mafia is so powerful that they outlaw free software altogether.

BSD-fags (with proprietary software company's jizz still dripping from their mouths): So freedom!, whatever you want! Copyleft hypocrites predicate love but they don't wanna suck Steve Job's cock

BSD-fags: RAPE, RAAAAAAAAAPE!
GPL A VIRUS!!!!
please abide by the BSD license!!! we can't incorporate your original work back because now it's GPL and Steve Jobs won't be able to make it proprietary!

Follow the money: Who would benefit from more software being released under cuck licenses?

You're wasting your time expecting anything but memes from Holla Forums.

Stallman is 63 years old, that's close to retirement age in most countries.

Restrictive licenses that protect the rights of the creator.

And where do you think their employers get money to pay the programmers? Out of thin air? Sell product -> Get money -> Have money to pay workers and purchase supplies -> Create product -> Sell product -> repeat
You retard communists have no fucking clue how the real world works.

And he's an obese slob with the sanitation of a homeless man, so he's probably going to die in the next couple months and it will be great.

I think I can own anything, even ideas, or the sky, if I can defend my ownership. However, it would be very expensive to stop people from ever expressing an idea in any of its infinite representations. It's expensive to stop people from breathing my air. I can't afford to have everyone who won't stop expressing ideas that I own locked away or killed.

Too many of our tax dollars go into protecting other people's IP. If everyone had to fend for themselves, we wouldn't have any concept of IP in the first place. IP is communism; piracy is freedom.

Which is sad because this board can be better than pointless politics and memes.

Are you implying this thread is the work of Holla Forums?

I side with BSDfags.

More stuff/options I can use for my GPLed code and proprietary products. I haven't seen this much support for the freedom to take away freedom.

...

Voluntary cooperation is now communism too? Gee, why don't we declare capitalism to be a form of communism too while we're at it? Both assertions would have equal validity.

Communism is sharing or you'll get killed. Go back to school, kiddo.

Allowing to convert free software into proprietary software is anti freedom.

The term "cuck" describes a guy who enjoys watching another guy fucking his wife. Now imagine your software is your wife and you choose a license to distribute it, which allows other guys to fuck with it (make it proprietary) while you're watching.

Reminder to upgrade to GPLv3

gplv3.fsf.org/static/release/rms_gplv3_launch_high_quality.ogg

Why have employers? Programmers don't need suits to tell them what to do. A firm that needs software would pay for functionality. There is no need for selling.

it's voluntary
stop crying about things you don't even have to use

cool meme
do the ((())) one next!

GPLv4 when?

Is there really a need for v4? There were 2 major reasons for v3, how many for v4?

Reminder there are people in this thread that want to divide us and incite distrust and hatred for each other.

Do you want to incite distrust and hatred for them?

Who would want to divide us and incite distrust and hatred for each other and why?

The evil marketeers at Microsoft want to stop the free software world from getting any work done by inciting arguments about licensing, because as we all know, Holla Forums is a hotbed for highly competitive programmers.

Reminder there are people in this thread
There are human beings this stupid
What the actual fuck is wrong with you people
Go outside

(((EYYYYYYYYYYYYY (sexp LAYDEEEEE))));?>

It's not like any of you spergs actually modify the code so who cares?

Which is why GPL is garbage.

...

Open Source Foundation is the final Holla Forums redpill.

Pale Moon on OpenBSD lad.

Why?

Because it allows the user to see the code in case if it's malicious and respects the rights of the manufacturer in order to set his own rules and prevent code plagiarism.

No such thing. You don't have a right to control the software on another's computer.

What does that mean?

And isn't it supposed to be a blend of the free software foundation and open source initiative or something? They basically set the same requirements.

I think you're replying to a markov bot, no human could craft such completely nonsensical bullshit

So do I, their heart is in the right place:

holy fuck, so much bait in this thread

This. /thread but already bit

The existence of open source software doesn't entail a world where everyone creates software for free. For example, I've written lots of software, more than most proprietary cucks, on my own free time, and got 0 pay for it. I do this because I want to. Similarily, lots of free (albiet closed source) games and software exists. Some of it profits the author, some doesn't. Your argument is far too vague and sweeping to even bother thinking about, so I'll stop there aside from pointing out that you're basically calling anyone who does any intellectual activity without pay for even 10 minutes (such as painting, botany, literature, linguistics, science, math) a communist (perhaps only if they publish their "work", but that still is a huge amount of people).

Software that is for business and software I have any interest in using are two completely different things. Aside from that even normies shouldn't use for example a file browser or chat program written by a business. It's too trivial an application to associate with business. Associating trivial applications with business just means now there's extra overhead to accomplish trivial goals, and they have to make some profit somehow (which is almost always bad for the user - for example, showing ads in a chat program - which is almost always done in an insecure way which compromises the chat program's security). also see above

I remember reading something on Stallman's site saying "you shouldn't go to jail depending on what state you're in and which pixels are on your screen", but if that's what you're going to use to back your argument you've just completely discredited yourself.

while devs being SJW is a good indicator that the code is probably crap, it's not a definite reason to avoid the software at all costs. what web browser are you using? they are all created by SJW and are all shit

fixed

The existence of open source software doesn't entail a world where everyone creates software for free. For example, I've written lots of software, more than most proprietary cucks, on my own free time, and got 0 pay for it. I do this because I want to. [Yet I've also made lots of money from making software too.]

Come back when you've spent some time in the real world.

None of you faggots even look at the code.

I see Holla Forums has arrived.

Nobody said they didn't exist, but they are unnecessary. They are simply a middle man.

checkm8. you got me there fam

(Im replying to the bottom of your post)

There is currently a force trying to divide and conquer Holla Forums and Holla Forums. This thread is an example of that.

...

Fuck off with the conspiracy bullshit faggot. Truth is, the world would be better without this kike license.

All they do is shitpost about things that are good that now we're supposed to hate because da joos. Holla Forums doesn't understand technology because they're a bunch of faggots that never went to school and instead sit around masturbating about how white they are, even though it's obvious most of them are wops and slavshit.

See:

Their idiocy for all the world to see.

Holla Forums is dead

this and only this

Or it's full of fucking shills and the useful idiots they control. Don't you get the point?

wut.

...

wow could it be that communists are not some evil force that is controlling the world and trying to force everyone to be a homosexual jew? Could it be that communists really just care about protecting the labor of workers? No! That makes no sense! They are evil jews controlling my mind!

Exactly. GPL kike shills and useful idiots must be purged.

Gee, I wonder who could be behind this post.

Shill

Reminder that you can scream all you want on imageboards like the wiggers you are, but at the end of the day this is a meritocracy. Those who write the code make the rules.

Does that automatically make their decision good?

Yes, those that can't code, need to shut up.

But I do code. Does that mean I'm allowed to have an opinion?

Yeah, but you have a shitty opinion if you think GPL is somehow evil.

Not him, but it is evil. Stop being a useful idiot.

How is it evil?

I think the opposite.

Stallman is a jew, red flag 1. Also, the license is communist in nature which has killed more whites than any other ideology.

No. Ideas are what matter. Attack the ideas or code, or kill yourself. On the internet, it doesn't make a difference.

Gee, I didn't know Steve Ballmer posted on fucking Holla Forums. There is more competition. If you don't like a programmer's work, you just let another one continue it. There is open competition because you can't force someone to use you instead of another.

Okay, so you don't know what you're talking about and instead of addressing the nature of the license, you resort to stupid shit like calling it communist and bringing muh white race into a discussion of a software license. Kill yourself, you stupid monkey.

Hi Holla Forums

don't bump cancer threads

Holla Forums infiltrator confirmed.

Let me deconstruct

Did you learn logic from Anita Sarkeesian? I can do that as well:

>we can't listen to you about software licensing because you're a fucking jew male!

Nice, you now have the same thinking process of an SJW.

...

It really tells a lot about the kind of people leftists are when they complain about a board having IDs to prevent subversion and samefagging. And yet Holla Forums still has over 5x as many active users as leftypol

For those unaware, understandable if you don't since leftypol has never produced an actual meme, idpol is a buzzword coined by those little parasites

GPL is cancer

You want a board with IDs? That's reddit. (I might be misreading because I can't be bothered to read the rest of that incoherent thread you're quoting)

How does it feel to be as retarded as an SJW?

OK, but what's wrong with GPL?

It is a license that promotes Richard Stillman's cult. The GPL2 even has the FSF's donation address so they can get rich on GPL software.

Nothing
GPL is an anarchist system that allows people to restrain freedom from other like the MIT license.
Mostly ignorant people and trolls says otherwise.

typo
GPL isn't an anarchist system

How? You haven't actually said shit.

What freedom does the GPL take away?

Freedom is freedom, even if your pussy ass can't handle it.

As expected from that hippie kike richard stallman.

The license has a stupid preamble at the beginning for the sole purpose of promoting Stallman's philosophies.

It gives a basic explanation of what the license does and why it exists in regular English. That's useful.

Richard Stallman is living with friends and relatives because he can't afford a home or even new clothes. He is one inch away from being a bum.

He actually got half a million dollars from a MacArthur Fellowship grant. He used to earn money programming (which he managed to combine with his work on GNU), but he doesn't have to do that any more.

I wasn't aware of that. It seems he kind of does live up to his word on living like a deadbeat.

And what is your problem with those philosophies? Free Software is about more than functionality, it's about freedom. Do you get pissed off at the preamble of the US constitution?

It's not needed on a license.

It's not needed, but that doesn't make it harmful. It's helpful. People reading the license can figure out what it does even if they don't know legalese.

It's helpful for anyone reading it, and people who don't read it won't even know it's there.

It's made by a kike, anything made by kikes is inherently evil

made by a poor kike
your argument is invalid

yes a poor kike
it doesn't apply

What's wrong with communism?

from
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm

RMS is far from this bullshit
In is view of things, basically, is that "everyone is free from doing what they want as long as you don't take freedom from another"

like the web, a decent idea with only shitty implementations

Most leftists (and even people on leftypol have said this) agree communism is complete shit. Communism only exists to fill capitalism's obligations. I've heard many leftists say it is meant to "succeed" capitalism rather than replace it.

Except capitalism has done far better than communism with no exceptions.

I agree. I think its all a matter of how entitled you have to be to think you're oppressed and how delusional you have to be to blame the system that you live a mediocre life instead of living in a fucking mansion even though you barely do any work for it. Enter leftists!

Communism in the Leninist sense of a stateless, classless, moneyless society has never existed. Countries proclaiming themselves "communist" did so with the intent of establishing communism as an ultimate end goal. One thing you should also understand is that in most interpretations communism can only exist on a global scale. Unfortunately, most of these countries failed utterly at even establishing the intermediate step, socialism, and often mutated into a sort of state capitalism monstrosity. Take the exploitative properties of private capitalism and apply them to a state structure and you have a recipe for rampant government corruption.

The reason you might hear some leftists say that communism is meant to "succeed" capitalism is that Marx argued that capitalism would have to run its course before eventually collapsing under its own internal contradictions and eventually giving way to socialism/communism when conditions became too intolerable. Lenin somewhat perverted this with the establishment of the USSR and its command economy, using capitalism to rapidly transform a backwater feudal serf nation into a modern industrialized nation in the span of only 30-40 years, and Mao and the PRC later followed in suit. Unfortunately, it is this logic that also lead to the compromises that eventually undid these great experiments and a large number of other so-called communist countries. Because what inevitably happened is that, in the pursuit of a fully industrialized nation, it lets state capitalists accumulate too much power and eventually when the time comes to actually give the works the means of production they naturally don't want to give up the power that the command economy gave them. In compromising for a time to build modern industry and infrastructure, they built the societal/political conditions to make actual transition into socialism too difficult.

I can't wait until I can get enough clients for some money. I'm going to start developing a BSD based tablet for general computing.

BSD license > GPL

BSD is truly free software for anyone to take and use as they see fit

GPL is commie "free" software that everyone has yet nobody can own.

Thank you, I hope someday we live in a world free of GPL. This board would be better off without leftist cucks ruining it.

Everyone but businesses can own it. You'd know that if you bothered to research anything you talked about.

You also have to share alike which isn't a huge deal for a software engineer doing everything right.

saging for anticipated shitstorm of Holla Forumstards spouting shit opinions at me

You realize everyone is a mutually exclusive statement right? You can't say "everyone" meaning everyone then say otherwise. You should say what you really mean which is "people can use the software but people can't use the software to make a profit"

Why do I have to share MY work I put effort into doing? What's wrong with my idea being proprietary? Why do others get a free lunch while I just did work?

Everyone can mean groups of people, and does not necessarily include all people and groups on the planet. You'd again know this if you researched anything you talked about.

>WHY DO I HAVE TO SHARE MY CANDYBAR MOMMY! I ONLY HAD YOU PAY FOR MOST OF IT!
Because that's the terms, faggot.

Software licensed under GPL V.2 is legally freeware because it says that the software is licensed FREE OF CHARGE.

Someone should alert the multi-billion dollar companies that make and contribute to free software and use it to make a profit.

What freedoms does BSD offer that GPL does not?

Apart from the freedom to restrict freedom, the freedom to combine the code with code under a couple of GPL-incompatible licenses like the CDDL. I think that's about it.

The freedom of not having to release the source code

So the freedom to take away freedom. Thanks for admitting that only assholes want BSD because they want free code without having to give anything back. Kill yourself.

I think you mean

selling for profit, offering service alongside your unsellable software for a profit does not count as selling that software :^)

You have no right to the source code of software you purchase. The BSD license does not "restrict" your freedom. Your need to know how my ideas work is not your right, and the BSD license respects that. If you don't want to buy my software for X use then you can fuck off because I'm sure as shit not giving it out for free.
red hat sells SERVICES alongside software they are UNABLE TO SELL because anyone with gcc can create the same proprietary blobs.

How many lines have you contributed to linux goy?

The thing I don't get is why freetards think selling support is the same as selling software, and the delusion that there is a point in selling open source software.

kek

No, but it doesn't preserve it, which while I will use BSD software, I will never write it with such a license. GPL all the way.

And you have no right to use GPL software and then make it proprietary.

So I guess you don't even plan on publishing any work under a free license. You're just bitching about GPL because it doesn't let you take code and use it without having to give anything back. You're a leech.

I won't even use your software.

And if you want to use my code and not give back changes, then you can fuck off because I also don't work for free. I want code back, not money.

You entitled niggers sure are fucking stupid.

This is true, GPL and FOSS only cares about the consumer.

Uh yeah is does? You have no right to proprietary software if you choose to purchase it.

Yes, one of the main reasons it is trash

You can't assume I wont contribute and who says I have to contribute my changes to someone else's idea? Saying the BSD license promotes leaching is just a way to bitch why isn't all software licensed like communism so you can get it 4free. Talk about leeches...

...

Fuck off kikes

Stallman didn't invent Free Software. He was merely a fat oaf with a pen and many, many people behind him. GNU would have turned out like a worse version of TempleOS if it was just Stallman working on it.

Spot the Jew.

GPL only requires share alike if the project is mostly unchanged or the majority relies on a GPL licensed piece of software.

No, they are bricks and mortar and ideas. Businesses can suck my dick.

Kill yourself.

What freedom does the GPL take away?

He who writes the code makes the rules. You fuck off :^)

zguide.zeromq.org/page:chapter6#Eat-Me

...

Your Propertarianism memes needs to stop.

Open Standard community/organizations doesn't function like USSR. It's function more like Anarcho-communism, which is harmless and not a global threat like Stalin/Lenin's communism was.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_communism
It's too weak to even hurt a fly.

You don't have to share anything. If you make a program and you are the only one using it then you have trivially fulfilled the requirements of the GPL. On the other hand, if you give your program to someone else, then you also have to let them make changes to it. But the decision to share your program in the first place was yours alone. What the GPL is saying is that you can't just share some of it in a "look, but don't touch" way. Being someone who has been burned by proprietary software I have to side with the GPL on this issue.

The freedom of being a Jew by taking other people's stuff, repackaging it and then selling it as your own without giving anything back and preventing the customers from making changes. With the GPL if you want to be a Jew by taking other people's stuff, repackaging it and selling it as your own, you at least have to give all the changes back and can't restrict the user's freedoms.

Complaining that the GPL is communism because it doesn't let you fuck with people is like complaining that you are living in a communist police state because the law doesn't let you murder people as you please.

The big disagreement is whose freedom is more important: the user's freedom over the software or the developer's freedom to fuck with the users. What the latter don't understand is that the GPL also protect them when they themselves are on the user-side of a software instead of on the developer side. It's like complaining that you are not allowed to murder people and failing to understand that the same law is also protecting you from getting murdered.

The freedom to control how your software you work on gets released.

Okay, then do that without using others' code. You're just mad that you can't get shit in exchange for nothing.

What if the GPL is exactly how I want the software I work on to get released. At no time I was trying to pick a license was Stallman holding a gun to my head, forcing me to license my work under the GPL.

This. These people want to be freeloaders who just take shit without giving anything back.

The only alternative is to write your own code.

Protip: you can't.

Licensing issues aside, BSD UNIX software (from the Berkley Software Distributions) is generally much higher in quality than GNUshit. Just because corporations aren't forced to contribute back to the code doesn't mean they do not. Look at Google/Apple for various examples.

Both licenses are very important. Anyone who claims one is superior to the other is simply supporting his/her ideology. Regardless, all of us here use software licensed with both GPL and BSD. Both have their uses in society.

You mean because their code is cleaner? Because minimal code was not what GNU was aiming for.

Don't underestimate clean usable code from competent developers. Lots of GNUshit is ok but a lot of stuff needs work!

GNU prioritized standarization and features over efficiency. The easiest example is its true program: even though it's so simple and basic that it wouldn't need explanation, it has a help function because all other programs do; they want to follow their own patterns. Its code isn't bad in the strictest sense, we are just butthurt about it because it doesn't suit our closet suckless tastes.

Also, if I recall correctly GNU's libc sorting algorithm was pretty rad.

It prioritized that not over efficiency, which is a vague concept, but over simplicity of implementation. It follows the MIT philosophy of correctness and consistency.

Remember that Unix man pages traditionally have a "bugs" section. Traditional Unix expects you to work around bugs and arbitrary limits. GNU tries not to have them in the first place, even if the software has to be more complex internally.

GPL is fine
BSD is fine
both are free software just use whatever, the only real problem is the retard autists that pick a side and fight the other

F-Fuck you!

It's not that easy user. While software licensed under GPL and BSD is basically free software, the BSD license gives power to companies who restrict the users freedoms. To prevent this, a free license should clearly disallow changing free software into proprietary software.

Some faggots call this "restriction", I call it "protection". That's the whole autism.

Even Stallman doesn't think the BSD license is bad, or that you shouldn't use BSD-licensed software. He just thinks it misses the opportunity to do a lot more good.

Neither license is bad, but the difference is important.

Holla Forums was a mistake

a true blight on the human existence

*cue "hurrr sjw cuck niggfjrjejfjgnejskcjgjeksj jfjjejejfjfjejsjgjtjdj jejsjsjfjejdjgjtnsbehgjd"*

fuck off kike

FALLING FOR THE FALSE FLAG OR A SHILL HIMSELF

At least sage when you reply to bait you faggot.

dude niggfjrjejfjgnejskcjgjeksj lmao

News to me, champo.

That's inaccurate. Let's call the kid who is talking to his dad A, and his friend B. If B borrows A's toys, B is only required to share A's toys with other kids, not necessarily his own. This whole analogy is inaccurate anyways, because transfer of software is done by copying, not removing it from one location and moving it to another, which you have to do to share toys. A more appropriate analogy would be a GPL'd joke.
A: Hey dad, can I tell B my new joke?
Dad: Sure, son, just make sure he agrees to share the joke with other kids and credit you for it.

An accurate representation of a BSD'd joke:
A: Hey guys, this is MY new joke. I came up with it all by myself. You're also not allowed to share it.
B: But I told YOU the joke!
A: Fuck you, you can't prove shit.

by picking any other terms I would either:
a) release proprietary software
b) release free software under a license without copyleft, opening the doors for point a)

you are just bike-shedding. there's no point in pursuing that "freedom".

lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2010-August/019310.html
ftp://ftp.cs.wisc.edu/pub/paradyn/technical_papers/fuzz-revisited.ps

nah, BSD UNIX software is just featureless and abandonware

these are not licenses, they are license families, licensing styles. The only importance in pushover licenses comes from a failure to care about free software. Copyleft on the other hand is our only tool to turn the abridgment of rights caused by copyright on its head.

blanket statement with no trace of critical outlook to find whether there's an actual, measurable, demonstrable superiority in one or the other. The fact that you dismiss arguments without bringing one of your own to support your dismissal is indication that you are the only who is ideologically motivated to remain neutral.

this.
software quality has more aspects than maintainability and security, this is software engineering 101.
GNU excels in portability, effectiveness (fearfulness), efficiency, robustness (although I know some suckless fags will raise some complaints). It's not particularly as good as OpenBSD in terms of security or maintainability, but I'm satisfied.

we are talking efficiency as in computational complexity theory. this is not a vague concept at all.

Taking away freedom is anti-freedom.

People can fuck with your software by modifying it if you use GPL. The only way to avoid getting cucked is to use a proprietary license.

Daily reminder that Theo de Raadt is an absolute fucking savage:

Speaking to Richard Stallman:
"I am going to ask some of the ports people to make the ports system point at a few more proprietary and non-free pieces of software.
In honour of your hypocrisy."