• God@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    … What? I may be dumb. I don’t see how libertarianism is compatible with being anti FOSS.

    • lntl@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The idea is that for code to truly be free, you should be able to make it proprietary. If you can’t do that, then it isn’t really free. That’s how I understand the idea anyway

      • God@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        But that’s not being anti, just accepting the possibility of it. Like i consider myself a libertarian and if you wanna make it close source, ok, I may dislike it but I won’t regulate against it. But being anti would imply I would go out of my way to censor your ability to do close source.

        • lntl@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s a GPL license thing. If you make a derivative work of GPL code, you’re NOT free to do what you want with it. This is where the 'anti come from.

          • God@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ah. Well I’m pro theft so just use it and close it if you want and pray for the best! Hide the evidence to not get sued.