| 1 Nov 2024 |
 unsungNovelty | And hence can't be put together in the Linux kernel like other file systems are. | 10:06:20 |
 ✝️🌞😎 HD Scania | In reply to unsungNovelty
Oh. Like that. No. I wasn't spamming with Linux parts. I was sharing a different side to using copyleft licenses is all.
Since linux is one of the biggest examples of it, I was just sharing observations. I never thought if ZFS were copyleft, and have no ideas why LF is against CDDL (whose licence inherited to Oracle after Sun) | 10:02:26 |
| unsungNovelty | It's not LF actually. CDDL is incompatible with GPL:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Development_and_Distribution_License#GPL_compatibility | 10:05:26 |
| ✝️🌞😎 HD Scania | CDDL is incompatible of GPL yes
But no CDDL isn’t copyleft | 10:06:19 |
 L. Piekhanov | We can see distros with full control, like void linux and gentoo, in which you actually build your kernel to the latest microdot of you wish | 13:00:30 |
| L. Piekhanov | In reply to unsungNovelty
BSD license is more permissive in the sense that it is one of the licenses that gives you maximum freedom.
While the copyleft license forces you to open source.
The interesting by product is BSDs has less corporate interference because it is permissive.
FreeBSD for example is not getting interfered cos the companies can take whatever they want and do whatever.
Apple, Playstation all can take whatever and do nothing.
The other side is Linux where since all the code needs to be open source.
So there is Linux Foundation run by corporations. Zero voice on the direction for an individual.
So licenses totally depends on your project and what you want to do with it. The corporative interference point seems extremely exaggerated | 12:59:36 |
 Damjan Jovanovic | In reply to @Jaypatelani:matrix.org
Linux foundation is run or nudged by corporation because they don't go full copy left like all OS +kernel GPLv3 or parity license 70% of Linux Foundation members are GPL violators, so yes, the fact they pay membership fees probably gets them some form of unofficial legal protection | 13:33:24 |
| Damjan Jovanovic | In reply to ✝️🌞😎 HD Scania
CDDL is incompatible of GPL yes
But no CDDL isn’t copyleft CDDL is copyleft, at a file level, as per its Wikipedia page.
Permissively licensed code, such as FreeBSD, gets along nicely with copyleft code, unlike other copyleft code | 13:36:02 |
| unsungNovelty | Same goes for Rust foundation which is run by some of the same companies which run LF | 15:17:02 |
| unsungNovelty | @lpierra - I highly recommend you to read https://www.unsungnovelty.org/posts/05/2023/open-source-projects-and-non-profit-501c3-vs-non-profit-501c6/
There is a difference in OpenBSD / FreeBSD foundation which are public charities vs Linux Foundation. | 15:14:00 |
| unsungNovelty | In reply to Piekha
The corporative interference point seems extremely exaggerated I should rephrase. I accidentally used interference in one sentence. Its not interference. Its just that LF runs Linux org and decides a lot of the decisions. Its not interference. Its how LF works. | 15:06:51 |
| unsungNovelty | Just to clarify... am not saying that it is bad or good. Am just informing its controlled by companies. Thats all. | 15:27:17 |
| L. Piekhanov | will read | 15:31:22 |
| L. Piekhanov | * We can see distros with full control, like void linux and gentoo, in which you actually build your kernel to the latest microdot of your wish | 15:19:54 |
 Jaypatelani🚩 | In reply to @telegram_1026262977:t2bot.io
I am not sure what you mean by this. Could you please clarify how that would change things?
Also its run by corporates. Not nudged. Its a Non-profit 501(c)(6) registered in the US. This is for business leagues. It operates for the foundation members. Not for the public or for charity.
LF pays Linus's salary as well. What I was trying to say was if LF used GPLv3 for everything there will be little interest for corporates | 15:47:33 |
| 2 Nov 2024 |
|  Second Player joined the room. | 03:31:50 |
| L. Piekhanov | Forwarded message from channel The Least Underrated Guide
http://tryinferno.rekka.io/ | 03:26:12 |
| L. Piekhanov | Inferno | 03:28:21 |
| L. Piekhanov | Forwarded message from channel The Least Underrated Guide
https://matt.might.net/articles/what-cs-majors-should-know/ | 03:26:48 |
| L. Piekhanov | I didn't even know about this, thoughts? | 03:27:20 |
| Second Player | unfortunately there are not (to my knowledge) active forks of it, but the main selling point (so to speak) is its vm specially built for userland tools | 03:29:37 |
| Second Player | about the site or about inferno itself ? | 03:28:06 |
|  raj changed their profile picture. | 07:13:25 |
| 3 Nov 2024 |
| ✝️🌞😎 HD Scania changed their profile picture. | 02:57:27 |
 js | In reply to @Jaypatelani:matrix.org
The thing is even with a GPLv3 license they won't donate more if they don't want to. They just won't use GPLv3. So it's working as intended. | 23:25:39 |
| js | In reply to @telegram_698921630:t2bot.io
I’m pro AI but FSF and Stallman are against AI You clearly have no clue. Stallman worked in AI, before it was cool. In the 70s, at MIT. | 23:28:06 |
| 4 Nov 2024 |
| ✝️🌞😎 HD Scania changed their profile picture. | 08:16:46 |
| Damjan Jovanovic | In reply to @js:nil.im
You clearly have no clue. Stallman worked in AI, before it was cool. In the 70s, at MIT. AI didn't work so well back then. It took deep learning and LLMs and the like, to make today's AI somewhat useful | 16:28:22 |
| ✝️🌞😎 HD Scania | In reply to @js:nil.im
You clearly have no clue. Stallman worked in AI, before it was cool. In the 70s, at MIT. That arc AI was never publicized until 2010s | 20:08:41 |
| js | In reply to @telegram_648404870:t2bot.io
AI didn't work so well back then. It took deep learning and LLMs and the like, to make today's AI somewhat useful That was an issue of computing power, most of the research is really old | 20:21:32 |
