• hobata@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      nope, here *GPL acts like cancer, once it touches something, it remains *GPL until the last bit of it is still there.

      • tabular@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Cancer is a bad analogy. It’s more like antibodies against non-free bactetia :)

        • hobata@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I have a completely different view of what free means. xGPL are restrictive and sticky.

            • hobata@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              GPL licenses are straight-up cancer, they force every derivative or linked project to adopt their viral copyleft rules, nuking proprietary reuse or easy mixing with other codebases, while a weird GPL cult preaches it as the one true path to “openness” and “freedom”. As someone who codes purely for fun, I like the dead-simple clarity of MIT and BSD: just keep the notice and license text, then do whatever the hell you want. No GPL bullshit or compliance headaches for me, permissive licenses like these keep my sanity intact.

              • cheesemoo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                That’s… The point of the GPL licenses, to preserve copyleft. I also prefer the simplicity of the MIT license for my own works, but I respect the copyleft ideals.

              • AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                GPL is especially popular with people who don’t want their labor of love to become a source of free labor for corporations who will tweak it, close the source, directly profit off it, and never donate or contribute patches. For them, it’s an antiparasitic license.

  • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    One of the commentors in there claims that Claude will straight give you struct sk_buffer. I dont have access to Claude but I vomited and went to chatgpt and it said it was copyrighted and couldnt give it to me. I know we hate AI, but ir changes so fast make sure your info is right. We cant take them down with falsehoods, even if they are freshly made false. If anyone has Claude and can test let me know.