Why isn't there a group of people who take lots of permissive-licensed projects (such as BSDs, browsers...

GPL is socialist, MIT is libertarian.
Currently, more people are running free socialist software on their computer than free libertarian software, and the former is often more secure, advanced and documented than the latter.
/liberty/ BTFO.

Drink more Stall-man cum faggot.

Actually I just realized most of us run ancap software thanks to Tenenbaum, and it just goes to show that you get nothing in return when the one of the biggest CPU maker in the world don't even bother to respect your labor by crediting you in their manuals (thus infringing the BSD license).

...

freedom means being free from having someone's brand of "freedom" being imposed on onesself

So being a literal slave is true freedom, because nobody is claiming you fall under their definition of "free."

I support GPL, but calling "BSD" meme licence slave labour is plain stupid. Most of the FOSS developers make the program for themselves and make available for free even if their time wasn't absolutely free. It's a personal decision, but copyleft is smarter way to release software if it's larger.

So chugging down Steve Ballmer's cum is freedom?
He's not imposing any definition of freedom on you! Would you look at that! Freedom from freedom!
Think of it, the endless reams of freedom from freedom when your MicroGoogleApple(R) brain-implanted chip makes you work forever and a day to make 1 little bit more of a computerized currency for the computerized avatars of long-dead stockholders! It's so meaningful and fulfilling!
Good thing you'll have never submitted to a definition of freedom made by that commiecuck Stallman and have therefore been free for the past 3 million years of hard work! War is peace, Freedom is slavery, Ignorance is strength!

That's not what true freedom is at all

"where there is no law, there is no freedom" - John Locke

>where there is no , there is no freedom
hmm really activates those almonds