Dr. Moose

Sure but again this is only a problem if copyright exists. Stallman himself invented GPL due to frustrations of copyright. The permisiveness is default human behavior that was corrupted by evil people and terrible systems. The neutrrance of copyright just returns us to this default state of sharing.

Sure but that’s mostly irrelevant in practice now. Gpl was notoriously unenforced so this aspect of “getting source code” almost never yielded to much in practice. FSF did a great job with limited resources it has but as code copyright is basically gone now and reverse engineering is so accessible we can actually empower real free software that is fully transparent and verifiable. If you imply that somehow we’ll start regressing existing tools to proprietary software I don’t see that at all.

Copyleft exists only because of copyright. If there is no copyright there’s no longer a need for copyleft.

Why? The entire purpose of GPL is to counteract copyright. If there is no copyright we no longer need GPL either.

Hot take: LLMs is the best thing has happened to open source movement:

• software copyright is defeated and basically eliminated in practice
• reverse engineering is so accessible that proprietary protocols cannot be hidden and can be reimplemented by AI agents as free software
• open weight LLMs are incredibly competitive and run on general hardware
• linux is de facto winner in all computing and rising in desktop and gaming niches

We’re literally in the golden age of free software

It’s just braindead luddites throwing meme words

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory

They think thay they will exit rich and leave some other bigger idiot with the bag. It’s gambling.

Every cover by Scary Pockets is incredible like sweet child o’ mine

They’re auto approved. Automation is not only a money saving strategy but a product strategy more si.

At the end of the day this is direct policy of Meta and they should be directly responsible for all harms ads create.

I genuinely don’t understand how anyone could argue otherwise - if one has a billboard above their house and put some CSAM on there they would be in prison. But not Meta? Who’s going to prison for this?

I care what my computer does the same way I care about what my brain does. Since my computer is just an extension of my brain it needs to be transparent and ownable.

Yeah I’m not picking up my phone to use your website. Bye.

https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/116550899908879585

How? I don’t see it.

Don’t see how you get your conclusion from the premise.

Equation? Is that what you think existance is?

Under which law it would be illegal? I’d love for this to be true but highly doubt it.

So confident about something we aren’t even remotely close to understanding

There’s nothing in free will that would prevent this though. I’m confused how you get to this conclusion.

I use Inkscape as infinite canvas for brainstorming and it’s awesome. The performance is so much better than any other tool I’ve tried too