in 2030 every vendor will have an explicit set of ideological precepts required to use their products an intricate web of faction-based firms will exist to cater to every recombination of ill-conceived Value Systems ending plea: pray to the yellowstone caldera
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
fuckin people exercising control over their property like assholes amirite
-
hes absolutely entitled to do as he likes and i support that right and i really wish people wouldnt
-
honestly it seems wholly unobjectionable to me, it's like coffeeshops refusing to serve pigs
-
exactly or like bakeries refusing to serve gays or w/e adopt the norm and the outgroup will reciprocate u know
-
Some people will use their freedom in ways I find shitty but tbh not having the freedom is shittier.
-
i dont think we disagree about anything?
-
probably not! it just sounded like you were into forcing bakers to gay it up instead of just socially shaming them and having ppl gofund the nice gay couple an extravagant 5-figure spitecake
-
no no no no no not at all they should be free to do their extremely dumb thing and everyone else to say: youre dicks
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I dunno, it's hilarious. I wish I was in zewest so I could pettily badger companies that had the misfortune of putting my code in their stuff and then dared to hurt my very fragile feels
-
LOL you are better adapted to this new dark age than i am gotta up my misanthrope levels
-
More seriously, I think this has a solid chance to even further cripple open source which is kind of like a wheelchair bound kid with leukemia already
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
there's that funny license that's like GPLv3 except for richard stallman, who is banned from using this
-
ok i support that wholeheartedly
-
this needs to be adopted by everyone using GPLv3
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
people have putting "no nuclear weapons" clauses in licenses for as long has software has existed and nobody knows what they mean
-
"You acknowledge that this software is not designed, licensed or intended for use in the design, construction, operation or maintenance of any nuclear facility." https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause-No-Nuclear-License.html …
-
i think that's a warning not to use it for safety-critical purposes, but "licensed" is very ambiguous because of how that term gets used in the nuclear industry; it's unclear if it means "licensed" as in "permitted by BSD license" or as in "licensed by nuclear regulatory bodies"
-
like http://www.onr.org.uk/software.pdf or https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/41/028/41028258.pdf … use the specific term "licensing of software" for nuclear reactors and they're not talking about if it's GPL or BSD
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.