/me grabs a little popcorn, and a little lemon juice to squeeze into these tears for taste. https://misterfpga.org/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2757 …pic.twitter.com/dhuGx7gHVm
-
I’m not familiar with that argument, but in its surface it seems like a completely separate issue from introducing a mechanism to make a piece of software or hardware artificially fail.
after you take a moment to familiarize yourself with the constructs of the argument, we'd be keen to hear your response to the situation at hand. Since we are getting wax poetic about rights management of the MiSTer project.pic.twitter.com/Cufy1JRX2V
-
-
I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic. In case you aren’t: closed source and DRM aren’t the same thing. If you can’t tolerate either it looks like you shouldn’t be using MiSTer. My line is drawn at DRM, not closed source.
-
We've come full circle: “It’s not that bad” has been the herald of the thin end of the wedge for as far as we can remember. Withholding your own changes to someone else's GPL Open Source is disgusting in all of its forms and like a cockroach, every violator you let go multiplies.
- Mostra les respostes
Conversa nova -
-
-
2/ And I don’t buy into the argument that keeping the code proprietary is some kind of DRM. It’s another form of control, but it doesn’t create artificial failure states.
-
"it doesn’t create artificial failure states" that is not entirely accurate. It creates failure states for folks that seek to do things via the Linux subsystem on their MiSTer. It absolutely is a form of gatekeeping just the same.
Final de la conversa
Conversa nova -
Sembla que triga molt a carregar-se.
És possible que el Twitter hagi assolit el límit de capacitat o que experimenti una sobrecàrrega momentània. Torna-ho a provar o vés a l'estat del Twitter si en vols obtenir més informació.