5 ms·
> Isn't this what the free software movement wanted? Code available to all? But this is not that. The current situations is closer to "what's yours is mine and
by probably_wrong 6mo ago
> Isn't this what the free software movement wanted? Code available to all?
But this is not that. The current situations is closer to "what's yours is mine and what's mine is mine".
I have been releasing my writings under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license which requires attribution and that anything built upon the material to be distributed "under the same license as the original". And yet I have no access to OpenAI's built-upon material (I know for a fact they scrape my posts) while they get my data for free. This is so far legal, but it's probably not ethical and definitely not what the free software movement wanted.
- joquarky 6mo agoWhat should be the maximum allowable cyclomatic complexity of license conditions?
- lostmsu 6mo agoYou can download Qwen 3.5 under Apache 2.0
- thedevilslawyer 6mo ago>not what the free software movement wanted Sorry, you don't speak for the movement. Plenty of us want this world.
- probably_wrong 6mo agoNo one speaks for everyone, but when TiVo used the GNU license in a similar one-sided way the free software movement reacted by creating a new GNU preventing exactly that. And, again, the Creative Commons license I'm using was designed (perhaps ineffectively) to prevent precisely this situation. So I feel confident saying that the past actions of the main referents of the free software movement support my view.
- thedevilslawyer 6mo agoSorry I was being polite. I'm part of the free software world, and you don't speak for me. And I like the new freedoms that I have to make more free software and free existing proprietary software by remaking them as free.