Ethics of open-sourced software development thread?

Hard to do when they live in progressiveland. Tech needs to move the fuck away from San Francisco, Seattle, Chicago, and NYC.

some other software this dev seems to be trying to shut down
github.com/Microsoft/web-build-tools/issues/673

given how increasingly prevalent this sort of thing seems to be, as well as recently deplatformings and increase in censorship it does seem to be leaving the industry in a bit of an uncertain state.
A lot of Silicon Valley companies are set to have a congressional hearing soon after Twitter does, it should be interesting to see what bearing it will have on the future development of software in general, and how it is maintained.

it was previously covered under the FOSS license, and was changed to the MIT license due to what seems to be entirely political reasons, and given the number of other developers currently using the FOSS license and related open-sourced ones that might feel the same, it feels like an important topic to discuss as it will likely impact the future of users here on Jow Forums.

In theory, under the current and old licenses, I believe so, yes.
In which case I suppose it would be more of a matter of informational access control then enforcing IP and licensing, which still carries its own concerns.

>can i simply clone your repo and then remove your """license"""?
You can remove the parts about ICE actually, yeah. The MIT license only requires that the full text of the original MIT license be retained in forks. There's no retention clause for this ICE shit, so you can fork this repo and change it back to the unmodified MIT license without violating anything.

>lerna
>tslint
>palantir
It's literally nothing

For now, yes.
It is important to have the ethics of such matters set before if becomes a serious issue, however.

open sores brfo

Attached: 1507832058508.png (537x44, 2K)

That's not even the problem. Tech companies are full of sociopathic alpha chad bro chameleons who blend in and gain power wherever they can and "losers", losers as in they're just looking for their next paycheck but not looking to win any power so they float around. Very few technical staff are actually super progressive trans otherkin nutjobs. It's a mix of people who mostly go with the flow cause they wanna get paid, a handful of opportunistic sociopaths who want to reign, and some freaks who like to be loud and are used as weapons by the aforementioned sociopaths, who are often white might I add. If top management wasn't all about HR and marketing then they'd tell the retards to get bent and take power back but the companies are unusually influenced from the bottom up

imagine a civil engineer or an architect pulling the same shit
software dev is a jolke

>arbitrary bringing politics into open-sourced software development
>when code for this software being written by people with different political views
Quite retarded way to kill your software.

I don't understand. Is this a repo for the actual MIT license? Then what "code" is that guy talking about?
Or is it a repo for a project using the MIT license? In that case adding a clause means it's a different license, you're not changing the MIT license, you're creating a new basedboy license based on MIT.
But in that case why do they need permission from contributors? The MIT license doesn't stop you from taking an entire repo and relicensing, so of course you can append clauses as long as the terms of the MIT one are met.

The moment you mix technology and sociopolitics, it stops being technology.

Everyone is 100% free to have sociopolitical opinions, and to be a sociopolitical activist for whatever cause they believe in. But do that as a personal thing, and do not bring it in with you to the workplace. It is unprofessional.

Useful idiots. Also the tech sector is only recently extreme left. Blame the millennials.

A fellow TOATTO reader I see. Good taste, fellow sociopath

well, Lerna is described as
" A tool for managing JavaScript projects with multiple packages."

So its basically fucking nothing, for now
But what if it happens to something actually important and/or useful soon?
If some critical lib for, say, debian or gentoo or something were moved to restricted liscensing due to some absurd political reasoning?
It sounds stupid and it is, but the fact remains that it may happen, and with small, insignificant things like this already happening, it might spur others of similar thought to start locking down their content

I mean, I'm sure most users of Jow Forums would just pirate the software or something at that point as usual, but the point it brings up is the larger impact this could have on the open-sourced community, should it become a wide-srpead issue

I mean, we already had something very nearly happen with that whole libreboot business not too long ago over more sjw nonsense
And where would that leave us, if the maintainers of such "open-sourced software" started trying to deny it to people based on their political leanings, or as in this case, based upon their means of employment and mass media hysteria of it?

>debian
psure the debian social contract or whatever the fuck its called prevents exactly this kind of stuff

Who tf cares, those people are all literally-whos and open sores is a fringe theory anyway.

you foss idiots are hilarious
I always end up hacking a bunch of code from your shit and earning money with it / I work like 4 hours per day and live comfortably because of you, thanks I guess

>some half useless piece of JS basedware
Who cares

pls consider making a small donation to the FSF/EFF/etc

Attached: lz-future-4.gif (454x340, 20K)

We get Pajeets on the whole open source thing and we win. No SJW bullshit.

>some half useless piece of JS s o yware
Who cares

pretty sure it's not legally enforceable to use a license to preclude users who abide by the law. so this is all basically pissing in the wind like just about everything else millenials do

But who is going to enforce it?
There doesn't seem to be much that can be done presently in the event of cases like this other then try to find (or make) an alternative, or pirate the thing
It just seems a bit of a flaw in the reasoning of open-sourced software here that people would voluntarily not sperg out and try to restrict their code because of something they saw on the news, when clearly there are people that will

Not saying the current maintainers of debian will do such a thing, but people change, or die off, or various other things that could happen
and it does not seem like there is an actual sort of safety net of sorts should something like this happen, or should, say, one of the devs have some sort of mental breakdown or something

Or for example something like this
falkvinge.net/2013/11/17/nsa-asked-linus-torvalds-to-install-backdoors-into-gnulinux/

and if he had accepted? What could we as end users really do about it? What could we do if we were entirely uninformed about it taking place?

Not that it will prevent people from using it as threats or extortion

Just like with copyright/IP laws

The lefties were the smart ones in the 90's etc..
But then social justice made em retarded.

Isn't github owned by microsoft? This is hillarious.

But user they don't give a shit about wealth inequality and how they serve it with their work or how the most anti immigration people are working class and are being silenced (in fact they celebrate it) they just want to maximize the number of shitskins immigrants and throw accusations of nazism,

I'm perfectly fine with this. If I was around during wwII I wouldn't let the gestapo license my software. Hell I'm probably going to go add this clause to my companies software tomorrow

>harassing
Term has lost all fucking meaning after women / socjus got ahold of it. The modern day definition of 'harassment' is any non-white-male who disapproves of the actions, opinions or beliefs of someone with lesser standing on the progressive stack.

The real definition of harassment includes obvious intent to commit an actual crime (example: antifa standing outside a small business and talking about smashing the windows).

because faggots

>tfw. you actually manage to be on the wrong side of a moral issue concerning the gestapo.

Attached: brainlet51.png (645x729, 63K)

Don't be stupid.

I've been writing software since the 80s. For most of that time the majority of developers were apolitical. After that in popularity were libertarian views, fringe ufo tier views, conservative views, and then least common the current communist social left views. Even in the Bay Area most developers weren't crazy leftists until recently. I don't see how it can last and the industry continuing to function long term.

youtube.com/watch?v=SMhwddNQSWQ

The only CoC we need is one that prevents these faggots from politicizing programming.

Chekem

>a literal mass murder organization that isn't bound by the law
>organizations that release consumer software and work within the framework of US, EU and international laws

They're exactly the same, comrade. CAPITALISM HAS FAILED

im sure software licensing is the right tool to fight nazis, real or imaginary

these leftards want to force everyone to think like them and shit's going to backfire badly. if one thing humanity has learned through history is that humans don't like to be forced to do shit they don't want to do.

Can I set up a licence that doesn't allow non-binary genders to use my code?

In my opinion, all those companies deserve this kind of stuff. They are the ones who promote all the sjw shit so fuck them

>the FOSS license
what is "the FOSS license"?

Stop fucking with licenses. It'll just make it painful to use software, and it's not like you're achieving anything with it other than making people ignore your software, even if they don't work at those companies.

Don't mix software and politics.

violates freedom 0.

Yes, author it's a classy hypocritical champagne socialist

different user, but google brings you this
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open-source_software

Freedom 0 should've never encompassed immoral purposes to begin with. Let's just reword it as
>freedom to run the program for any non-evil purpose

Evil is a vague definition that evolves over time and is twisted by weird people.

github.com/lerna/lerna/pull/1633

Attached: ahhh yesssss.png (300x303, 80K)

Ethics of proprietary shit is determined by whatever is mainstream/profitable. There's a timeline where Google puts "gas the kikes, race war now" under its logo on 4/20 if they thought that was acceptable and profitable.

Open source shit is however at the mercy of the personal discretion of the handful of people who work on it, and as a result easily subject to conflicts between personalities and making decisions such as the one you posted.

>TOATTO
the hell is that?

Ahaha reverted

>Effective immediately, James Kyle has been removed from the GitHub org and will no longer have the privilege of making direct contributions to the source code.

Attached: 1515359422704.gif (400x264, 408K)

>TOATTO
please tell me what that is. I wanna read it.

Get woke, get broke.
Also reading that, it's like if the guy was infected by a zombie plague.
On one moment being a happy little contributor, but then suddenly "getting woke" and fucking everything.

>github.com/lerna/lerna/pull/1633
> it has been very clear for quite some time now that he has decided to cease making constructive contributions to the Lerna codebase as well as actively and willfully disregarding the code of conduct that he himself added to the project.
>code of conduct that he himself added to the project.
TOP KEK

WE DID IT REDDIT

This guy got removed by the SJW CoC that he himself added, topkek

once again, real professionals win over political lunatics
hopefully politicizing licenses ends here

Attached: 1533426540632.png (550x400, 193K)

>look at Jamiebuilds github
>524 repositories

wtf? does he just clone everything he sees?

whats his next move

polluting his twitter with a bunch of shitty posts and replies. that's what it looks like right now anyhow.

Based and redpilled

Crashing GitHub with no survivors

>hopefully making nonfree licenses ends here

fixed for you retard. politics are what created freedoms in the first place. you people are stupid

>politics are what created freedoms

You are born free. Politics is what restricts those freedoms to make you live in a society.

Politics has no reason to be involved in code or anything outside of Politics for that matter. People who try to do this and force it down other peoples throats are cancer and some of the worst people to deal with.

youtube.com/watch?v=tC0FZnXRrYM

His face when

Attached: 1535076962668.jpg (983x750, 266K)

>Politics has no reason to be involved in code or anything outside of Politics for that matter. People who try to do this and force it down other peoples throats are cancer and some of the worst people to deal with.

fuck off retard. m-muh politics bugman shit is literally CIA as fuck. every single fucking thing you do in your life is politics and not playing is literally the only move that's guaranteed to make you powerless.

Never understood the need for licenses for open source other than bragging rights. It's just as toxic as patents and it's a loss of time dealing with these dramas.

i think he moreso means politics should not impact the content matter of software

you know, reducing human error and all that

well they exist because of shit like patent trolls

where someone could invent something wonderful
release into the world
have some greedy chucklefuck corporation take all the credit for inventing it themselves
and then sue the original creator for absolutely everything

because 'murica
or "muh superior european culture"
or whatever bs excuse you want to use really

Oh no! Just as Jamie was proudly stating that Vice had contacted him for an article.

LOL!

like that gettysburg stock images companies suing people for having pictures of themselves, and trying to claim copyright on someone's picture of themselves

or monsanto trying to copyright some guy's genetics because they're kinda weird and they might be able to make money off it

moar liek build teh wall

I was using a type of pressure sensitive membrane developed by a small company for a project I had going a couple of years ago. Then some tech giant bought the patent because they felt it encroached on some bullshit they made with way less quality and at 100 times the price. Now they're just sitting on the patent, and it will never be produced again. Basically my little fun-project went from being units you could cobble together for a couple of bucks to a several hundred dollar investment.

If you're wondering why there's so little technological progress and innovation these days, here's one of the main reasons.

And why is that? The only real issue I have with this lerna bullshit is making it nonfree software without even the decency of asking past contributors to agree to relicense or to clearly mark the copyrights of those segments as MIT.

Literally don't give a shit if the faggot added text saying m$ is raycis or some shit. Since it is Foss, you can strip that shit out anyway and vote with a fork.

This shit only happen in JS land, the place where hipsters end up.

Well, from the looks of it, Rust could be next.

>go instantly from restricting the liscence because "muh politics" straight to paywalling
oy vey

Attached: Screenshot_2018-08-30_00-35-20.png (836x180, 22K)

alright, lets use an absurd hypothetical here to get the point across

what if, for whatever reason, sjws suddenly decided that the number "1" was sexist, because it looks like an erect penis or some shit idk

but they decieded it was wrongbad and started banning it from stuff, including software

Why should something be changed as such simply because of politics and how people feel?
Would you ban a function simply because someone in silicon valley decided it was racist, even at the cost and greatly impairing the functioning of your software?

>Since it is Foss, you can strip that shit out anyway and vote with a fork.
that's kind of the fucking point. But having the need to remove such stuff in the first place is horribly inefficient and entirely unnecessary.
I'm saying things should be just in the absolute minimum they should be to run, and do their job the best they can (and before you ask, yes I do absolutely hate how badly things have gotten particularly in clunky html and other online crap for that. it is inexcusable and things were not nearly that bad back in the 90s, there are tons of extra crap added that often times does absolutely nothing at all, Or is ad crap like utraffic.engine.adglare.net on this very fucking site)

point being, its ridiculous, stupid, and a waste of everyone's time, not unlike your posts.

The problem for Jamie is that you can't retroactively enforce a license. Meaning that you can take the last released version under said license and fork it, as it was just a simple MIT license to begin with.

This SJW, commie idiot is just shouting his way out of the industry right now. No one wants to work with a lunatic like him.

Attached: disgust.jpg (600x448, 20K)

>USA is build what it is today by migrants
>suddenly
>FUCK OFF CUNTS WE ARE FULL LMAO

No, as it is no longer "the MIT license."

>t. 56% amerimutt

No. They can't change the license without consent from all contributors or remove their code. What they are doing is illegal.

>t.Scandinavian Ahmed

Somebody doesn't know the definition of "copyright."

still whiter then you amerifat

>copyright
To be fair, Monsanto has never tried to copyright genetics. They have patented genetics, which is very different.

>The real definition of harassment includes obvious intent to commit an actual crime
No it doesn't.

Harassment covers a wide range of behaviors of an offensive nature. It is commonly understood as behavior that disturbs or upsets, and it is characteristically repetitive. In the legal sense, it is behavior that appears to be disturbing or threatening. Sexual harassment refers to persistent and unwanted sexual advances, typically in the workplace, where the consequences of refusing are potentially very disadvantageous to the victim.

ha·rass·ment
həˈrasmənt,ˈherəsmənt/Submit
noun
aggressive pressure or intimidation.
"the state also grants us the right to pursue this belief without any form of persecution or harassment"
synonyms: persecution, intimidation, pressure, force, coercion; informalhassle

>white
>half the country is from Morocco and south Kongo
k bud