Linux

49774 readers

476 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Essence - A desktop operating system built from scratch, for control and simplicity. (nakst.gitlab.io)

submitted 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

23 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Landing page

https://essence.handmade.network/

Screenshots

https://twitter.com/_nakst/status/1477247856805351425

We do not have a specific category for OS that dos not fit into Linux, Mac, Unix or Windows, so I posted it in here because I think that could be more interesting for Linux user.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 children)

Indeed, copyleft is not enough to guarantee that corporations won’t make money with your code. Without modifying the code, an evil company could increase its profit just by using your software.

Correct, but depending on the specific license, they would still have to distribute the source (read: not JUST credit you, THEY have to independently provide a way of getting access to the source code), and if they make any improvements, which they'll probably want to do, they have to share that back with you. This results in the product itself continuously improving for everyone, profit or not.

If there wasn't a license term against it, companies will be greatly incentivized to keep any improvements they made closed and therefore their product will be better than the original open source product, which will give their now proprietary product an edge in the market, which has historically shown to be enough to snuff out the original open source efforts.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

Actually, I was only meaning use it internally to improve their own workflow.

They can still bundle it with other things, only release your code, secretly improving only what they did on top of your API and make money out of the bundle, so why stoppping there and using a free license rather than something with a NC clause?

On the other hand, one could argue that GPL would refrain a corp from including your software in their product, while at least the cite you get with the MIT license at least gets you some advertisement and potential contirbutors.

What if other free software developers use a license incompatible with the GPL for their own reason, is it OK to deprive them from the right to simply incorporate your code in the name of fighting big tech?

I don't mean to say that it does not make sense to use the GPL, it is probably the most sensible choice if your aim is to fight big tech corporations. But not every piece of software is written as a commercial weapon.