undefined | Better HN

0 pointsnickpsecurity8y ago0 comments

It's a tangent but I'm all for calling out hipocracy. Author should've used Creative Commons or public domain.

0 comments

It's not hypocrisy. Defending an overall elimination of IP is not the same as supporting individual self-abnegation. Self-sacrifice that doesn't lead to the desired goal is just masochism.

nickpsecurityOP8y ago

That wouldn't apply here since the goal was to spread an idea but that copyright made spreading it illegal without a license. Modifying to Creative Commons aids the goal plus is cconsistent with stated principles. So, it's the best move.

Fortunately, the author agrees and intends to change the license.

TaylorAlexander8y ago

I just mentioned above (after your comment) that it's just an oversight. That text was built in to the Ghost template I used and I never bothered to change it. But I absolutely will change it to Creative Commons next time I make updates to the site.

nickpsecurityOP8y ago

Great! Glad it was just an oversight. Creative Commons also has helpful descriptions on their website to simplify picking your preferred license. Will make it easier.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

icebraining8y ago

It's not hypocrisy. Defending an overall elimination of IP is not the same as supporting individual self-abnegation. Self-sacrifice that doesn't lead to the desired goal is just masochism.

nickpsecurityOP8y ago

Fortunately, the author agrees and intends to change the license.

TaylorAlexander8y ago

nickpsecurityOP8y ago

Great! Glad it was just an oversight. Creative Commons also has helpful descriptions on their website to simplify picking your preferred license. Will make it easier.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse