this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
849 points (96.9% liked)

Technology

58845 readers
4820 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

This is about open-source being open. I'm a very non-tankie, and I think this is bad- though a bit better if its only people working for sanctioned companies.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

Go look at the principles of open-source or free software as defined either by the OSI and the FSF and then come back when you find the one that says that Linus needs to violate US sanctions to keep employees of Russian companies in trusted roles within his project.

Also, what does this have to do with being tankie or not? Modern Russia is very openly not communist.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

.ml is full of tankies. Also, nothing in open-source principles say that to my knowledge. Am I not allowed to have beliefs not explicitly defined by the OSI?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

The OSI's definition of open-source software is the de facto definition used by most people, and for most of the remaining people that don't, they (mistakenly, because they define "free" software, not "open-source") defer to the FSF's defintion of free software.

So yes, you should be explicitly noting that what you define as "open" has nothing at all to do with the far-and-away most widely used definition(s) of "open-source".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 hours ago

Yes, and I said I want open-source to be open. As in not just open-source, but also open to all. That is my personal moral value, and I advocate for that. What the OSI supports has nothing to do with that.