undefined | Better HN

0 pointsnewen7y ago0 comments

This idea that are large and influential project like Python is just the same as a hobby project I put on github and do in my spare time is ridculous. I am pretty sure most of the core contributors of Python are doing it as part of their 9-5 job.

Then there is the implication that because they are doing it for pleasure, they don't owe anything to anyone. It's ridculous. This software affects millions of people and it's not a dumb hobby project.

0 comments

xj97y ago

actually, by using Python you explicitly agree that PSF doesn't owe you anything :)

https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/master/LICENSE

4. PSF is making Python available to Licensee on an "AS IS" basis. PSF MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. BY WAY OF EXAMPLE, BUT NOT LIMITATION, PSF MAKES NO AND DISCLAIMS ANY REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR THAT THE USE OF PYTHON WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY THIRD PARTY RIGHTS.

5. PSF SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO LICENSEE OR ANY OTHER USERS OF PYTHON FOR ANY INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR LOSS AS A RESULT OF MODIFYING, DISTRIBUTING, OR OTHERWISE USING PYTHON, OR ANY DERIVATIVE THEREOF, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY THEREOF.

newenOP7y ago

I'm talking about social responsibilities. Not about legal liabilities.

If there is not implied social responsibility that PSF keeps python running, then no one will be using it.

megaman227y ago

Why? As long as python.exe runs code, people will use it. And there's too much money invested in it for people that have done so to let it just die.

1 more reply

msla7y ago

> Then there is the implication that because they are doing it for pleasure, they don't owe anything to anyone. It's ridculous. This software affects millions of people and it's not a dumb hobby project.

... no more ridiculous than the idea that software which millions of people depend on should be a commercial product, or a government project, and beholden to the politics of CEOs and/or government bureaucrats.

whyever7y ago

If it is part of their day job, the responsibility is towards their employer, not their users.

The millions of users are usually providing nothing in return for the software, I don't see how that entitles them to anything. In fact, I think it is the user's responsibility to make sure the software is appropriate for their use.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse