undefined | Better HN

0 pointslelanthran1y ago0 comments

> If BSD wasn't available under terms Sony liked, they'd be using QNX or something more obscure and just as inaccessible to their users.

That's the point: if they don't want to contribute their changes back, they should spend their own money writing their own software.

Right now, they'd take thousands of hours of effort from the community, add a few hundred of their own and then close off the product from the very community that they so willingly took this charity from. Yay BSD license!

If they had to use QNX or similar, they'd pay to do it. If they had to use GPL, they'd pay to close off their changes, which would be great for funding more free software.

> For better or worse, all the big console manufacturers see their ability to lock down their platform as vital to their development and business strategies. Vital to their ability to charge $60 for a few gigabytes of 1s and 0s.

Well that's why I divided the licenses into "pro-user" and "pro-corporate". The BSDs are pro-corporate.

0 comments

timschmidt1y ago

> If they had to use QNX or similar, they'd pay to do it. If they had to use GPL, they'd pay to close off their changes, which would be great for funding more free software.

Last I checked there were about a thousand open source OSes. Hundreds under BSD-like licenses. Here's a partial list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_BSD_operating_systems

It sounds like you're advocating for wiping them all from history and outlawing everything but GPL licensed code, which just isn't possible, nor desirable. Sorry?

lelanthranOP1y ago

> It sounds like you're advocating for wiping them all from history and outlawing everything but GPL licensed code, which just isn't possible, nor desirable.

That's a strawman: Nothing I said implied any sort of genocide.

I'm pointing out that the pro-user license has more benefits than the pro-corporate licenses.

timschmidt1y ago

> That's a strawman

Is there another reading of "If they had to use" that I'm not aware of? Seems to imply force either through legal or practical means.

> the pro-user license has more benefits than the pro-corporate licenses

I'm a user and a developer and neither of those descriptions seem to apply to the licenses being discussed. I benefit from both, as do you, as does the whole world.

I bet proprietary software vendors get a real chuckle out of this sort of infighting.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointslelanthran1y ago0 comments

> If BSD wasn't available under terms Sony liked, they'd be using QNX or something more obscure and just as inaccessible to their users.

That's the point: if they don't want to contribute their changes back, they should spend their own money writing their own software.

If they had to use QNX or similar, they'd pay to do it. If they had to use GPL, they'd pay to close off their changes, which would be great for funding more free software.

Well that's why I divided the licenses into "pro-user" and "pro-corporate". The BSDs are pro-corporate.

0 comments

timschmidt1y ago

> If they had to use QNX or similar, they'd pay to do it. If they had to use GPL, they'd pay to close off their changes, which would be great for funding more free software.

Last I checked there were about a thousand open source OSes. Hundreds under BSD-like licenses. Here's a partial list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_BSD_operating_systems

It sounds like you're advocating for wiping them all from history and outlawing everything but GPL licensed code, which just isn't possible, nor desirable. Sorry?

lelanthranOP1y ago

> It sounds like you're advocating for wiping them all from history and outlawing everything but GPL licensed code, which just isn't possible, nor desirable.

That's a strawman: Nothing I said implied any sort of genocide.

I'm pointing out that the pro-user license has more benefits than the pro-corporate licenses.

timschmidt1y ago

> That's a strawman

Is there another reading of "If they had to use" that I'm not aware of? Seems to imply force either through legal or practical means.

> the pro-user license has more benefits than the pro-corporate licenses

I'm a user and a developer and neither of those descriptions seem to apply to the licenses being discussed. I benefit from both, as do you, as does the whole world.

I bet proprietary software vendors get a real chuckle out of this sort of infighting.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse