>he doesn't contribute to open source
He doesn't contribute to open source
Other urls found in this thread:
gnu.org
gnu.org
twitter.com
What an inane comment.
>he contributes to open sores
I do though.
I don't contribute to anything
newfag
Not so much inane as it is cheap
Newfag
Open Source projects usually have some serious license fuckery going on.
Contributing my digital labour so someone can disrespect my digital freedoms? I don't think so.
That another way of saying someone's right
>open source
gnu.org
Look up “Jow Forums inane comments”
That really depends on the license. The MIT and BSD licenses are more free than the GPLs out there
>He says open source instead of free or libre software
Open source is what the botnet yells so you jump into it's van. You won't get happy there. Contribute to free sorftware instead.
I do, but only when it's relevant to me. I don't force myself to be a "contributor"
Reference or gtfo
Massively bluepilled take. You've been propagandised by corporate "developer evangelists". Depropagandise yourself pronto!
where do i start? i don't know what shit im really interested in other than gamedev and maybe some app dev. i wouldnt know where to start with contributing to some language or automated test lib or some shit.
>its only truly freedom when i allow the other guy to enslave me
Someone told stallman to go to Jow Forums Jow Forums, and he came, he saw, he replied “I tried to visit that site but saw only inane comments” and thus Jow Forums was told.
Nigger I can barely bring myself to show up at work so I can get paid and not starve, you have another thing coming if you think I'm going to slave away for free.
That's funny, because the GPL is actually restrictive - not free
If a game isn't on Linux, I pirate it. Does that count?
Prove it.
There's no enslavement - it's simple CSRG continuation. As long as you're being paid by your employer, there's no slavery
Linux is a kernel. Which operating system are you referring to?
GPL demands you to open source changes made to the original work. BSD and think also MIT licenses allow you to take the code and develop proprietary derivatives from it.
Payed posters ruined this board.
>I actually believe people are being paid to post on meme sites
>open source
Look up open washing, newfriend
also stop posting Stallman combined with stupid shit like open source
The frontend of my website is open source.
>unironically being this new
>proving my point to continue meming
Faggot
>I think Stallman's take on free software is actually free
Linux
kek
Linux is a kernel. Which operating system are you referring to?
>Stallman
>Open Source
Lurk moar faggot
Stallman cares more for open source than freedom. The GPL, which restricts users to open source changes made to the original work, is the quintessential example of it
My work costs money. Everything that's actually good does. Freetards lmao
I don't and I have already stole code from some not-so-popular open sores libraries and used them in some programs I sold for small companies.
That's fine if you didn't alter the licenses and open source your changes as well
I submitted my first bug report, with debugging symbols today. Does this count?
That depends on the license of the work you submitted a bug report for
It is a KDE application. Not sure exactly what the license is. Who even cares about licenses when the programs are open source
The goal of GPL is to eliminate proprietary software.
>freedom to steal
free code stays free, nonfree code does not.
based as fuck
I bought a coffee mug from one of the links on the official Gentoo site.
it still provides the freedoms that stallman defined as free software
yes and he did it for the sake of free software
t. Sony
Android.
But I do user, I contribute to software a lot of anons here probably use.
based. I use Arch now but I miss it a little
(((GNU))) needed the help of a skinny Nordic nerd to even make it usable
It was already working years before with Mach, you retard. It was about being free, not just about working.
It's only open source because of a chosen open source license, user
And by forcing it, it is essentially restrictive
Which is not free at all by using restrictive means. Surely you the irony in Stallman's actions
good goy
>open source
No because it doesn't restrict any rights people morally have in the first place
im a fucking nigger tho