6 ms·

ah this is actually quite valuable because it utilizes CV I'm kinda surprised why you chose to open source this instead of slapping AGPLv3 like all the YC fund

ah this is actually quite valuable because it utilizes CV I'm kinda surprised why you chose to open source this instead of slapping AGPLv3 like all the YC funded github projects are doing

suchintan 3y ago
Haha we are not unique there. We chose AGPL-3 as well -- become some would argue it's like an open source virus -- everything it touches must become open source! How exciting.
- hamoodhabibi 3y ago
  suchintan are you on X by any chance how can i contact you
  - suchintan 3y ago
    You can message me on our discord or email me suchintan@skyvern.com
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
nextaccountic 3y ago
Regarding "instead of": AGPL is open source too
- anonzzzies 3y ago
  Might as well not be for many companies; I know many who are not allowed to even glance at AGPL code for fear of getting infected (and sued).
  - orra 3y ago
    That's a them problem. AGPL is clearly open source.
    - anonzzzies 3y ago
      Sure, but that doesn’t change the reality. I would say ‘their loss’, but I think it’s more nuanced than that.
  - littlestymaar 3y ago
    There's an easy way to avoid being sued though: comply with AGPL and make your own work open-source as well. The “problem” with AGPL is companies who want to use open source software to build proprietary stuff on top without contributing anything back. AGPL is purposely designed to avoid this kind of parasitic behavior, but that doesn't make it “not open source” quite the opposite: it's “forced open-source”. It is indeed restricting companies' freedom though: their freedom to restrict their user's freedom.
    - anonzzzies 3y ago
      Sure and I am all for it; I am just saying what my clients say to us. So for them (and it’s most of them, even if they never have any intention of changing the source code, ever), if it’s this license, they won’t touch it. That’s coming from their lawyers, no matter what we/I say.
      - littlestymaar 3y ago
        Sure, but this has nothing to do with AGPL not being “open-source”.
        anonzzzies 3y ago
        Indeed, but I said ‘might as well not be’ which is not saying it’s not; it’s that companies treat it as not having access to the source.
torginus 3y ago
I did desktop UI testing a couple years ago on Windows apps, and the standards solution there is to use UI Automation, which itself works by sending messages to each app that makes them run internal queries to find elements. It seems like quite the intuitive approach, but we quickly discovered that due to differing implementations, and the reliance on the apps actually cooperating with you, it's actually so much more reliable and much faster to use OpenCV to physically detect UI elements by appearance.

ah this is actually quite valuable because it utilizes CV I'm kinda surprised why you chose to open source this instead of slapping AGPLv3 like all the YC funded github projects are doing

suchintan 3y ago

Haha we are not unique there. We chose AGPL-3 as well -- become some would argue it's like an open source virus -- everything it touches must become open source! How exciting.

hamoodhabibi 3y ago
suchintan are you on X by any chance how can i contact you
- suchintan 3y ago
  You can message me on our discord or email me suchintan@skyvern.com
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

nextaccountic 3y ago

Regarding "instead of": AGPL is open source too

anonzzzies 3y ago
Might as well not be for many companies; I know many who are not allowed to even glance at AGPL code for fear of getting infected (and sued).
- orra 3y ago
  That's a them problem. AGPL is clearly open source.
  - anonzzzies 3y ago
    Sure, but that doesn’t change the reality. I would say ‘their loss’, but I think it’s more nuanced than that.
- littlestymaar 3y ago
  There's an easy way to avoid being sued though: comply with AGPL and make your own work open-source as well. The “problem” with AGPL is companies who want to use open source software to build proprietary stuff on top without contributing anything back. AGPL is purposely designed to avoid this kind of parasitic behavior, but that doesn't make it “not open source” quite the opposite: it's “forced open-source”. It is indeed restricting companies' freedom though: their freedom to restrict their user's freedom.
  - anonzzzies 3y ago
    Sure and I am all for it; I am just saying what my clients say to us. So for them (and it’s most of them, even if they never have any intention of changing the source code, ever), if it’s this license, they won’t touch it. That’s coming from their lawyers, no matter what we/I say.
    - littlestymaar 3y ago
      Sure, but this has nothing to do with AGPL not being “open-source”.
      - anonzzzies 3y ago
        Indeed, but I said ‘might as well not be’ which is not saying it’s not; it’s that companies treat it as not having access to the source.

torginus 3y ago

I did desktop UI testing a couple years ago on Windows apps, and the standards solution there is to use UI Automation, which itself works by sending messages to each app that makes them run internal queries to find elements. It seems like quite the intuitive approach, but we quickly discovered that due to differing implementations, and the reliance on the apps actually cooperating with you, it's actually so much more reliable and much faster to use OpenCV to physically detect UI elements by appearance.