paritybit.ca

Unnamed repository; edit this file 'description' to name the repository.
Log | Files | Refs | README | LICENSE

commit 7662e1f5a90cb2efa7211b23b9fa2482d03df725
parent e4a5d36bdd28904fcabb0948194693f2f817829e
Author: Jake Bauer <jbauer@paritybit.ca>
Date:   Mon,  8 Nov 2021 03:34:37 -0500

Draft of latest blog post

Diffstat:
Mpages/blog/free-software-is-an-abject-failure.md | 13++++++-------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/pages/blog/free-software-is-an-abject-failure.md b/pages/blog/free-software-is-an-abject-failure.md @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ ## Free Software is an Abject Failure -[//]: # "Free Software is an abject failure. It may sound like a good concept on its face—especially with the kind of language often used to describe the movement and its opponents—but, when put under scrutiny, the institutions and practices that make up the Free Software movement fundamentally fail at their stated goals. Free Software is an ideological mess, Free Software hampers collaboration, Free Software is legally ineffective, Free Software makes the lives of users and developers harder, and Free Software fundamentally gets in the way of a thriving software ecosystem." +[//]: # "Free Software is an abject failure. It may sound like a good concept on its face—especially with the kind of language often used to describe the movement and its opponents—but, when put under scrutiny, the institutions and practices that make up the Free Software movement fundamentally fail at their stated goals and harm the software ecosystem as a result." [//]: # "main.min.css" @@ -17,11 +17,10 @@ software freedom evangelist. I used to license all my works GPLv3-or-later and CC-BY-SA wherever I could and I used to believe quite strongly in the words of Richard Stallman. I have since started to think more about the real effects of the Free Software movement and have changed the way I write and license my -software as a result. I implore you to genuinely consider what I write in this -post and to approach it with an open mind. I understand that your knee-jerk -reaction may be to reject what I am saying as anti-freedom or pro-corporation -but that is not the case. I simply no longer believe in the Free Software -movement.</p> +software as a result. I implore you to genuinely consider what I have written in +this post and to approach it with an open mind. Your knee-jerk reaction may be +to reject what I am saying as anti-freedom or pro-corporation but that is not +the case. I simply no longer believe in the Free Software movement.</p> Free Software is an abject failure. It may sound like a good concept on its face—especially with the kind of language often used to describe the movement @@ -464,7 +463,7 @@ remove the overhead of having to think about who owns the software. In the case of software in the public domain, you don't have to worry at all because there is no owner. In the case of permissively-licensed software, it's a simple matter of copy-pasting the necessary notice(s) wherever that code is used. These -licenses are also simple and easy to understand and the culture surrounding them +licenses are also simple, easy to understand, and the culture surrounding them is such that you don't have to worry about a mob coming after you for forking the project and morphing it into something that serves your needs, nor do you have to worry about being sued for an accidental violation of a license that