[ad_1]
A generation ago, Microsoft founder Bill Gates offered his ideas on how to create better, more useful, writing software. a painful letter to the “players” who shared in his company’s BASIC program: “Who can afford to do professional work for nothing? What fun-loving person would put three years of human experience into programming, finding all the bugs, writing what they did, and distributing them for free? The fact is, no one else but us has invested so much in the sport. ”
Nowadays there is another type of hybrid machine, where technology giants like Google, Facebook, and others are very supportive of the free Linux software, which is still essential for their businesses. Instead, 75 percent of the offerings on Linux come from software developers working for companies. The system has made these companies very rich, and their role is great. They’re not afraid of a small start in releasing them using Linux — as they did with Microsoft. Even Microsoft has changed its mind. Company President Brad Smith said last year that “Microsoft was on the wrong side of history when the open source exploded at the turn of the century, and I can only say this for myself. The good news is that, if life is long enough, you can learn … that you should change. ”
This success, however, has brought about a major change: A project that was originally supposed to help younger players is now introducing a bigger one. It is a change of knowledge that the community should not consider again. This is because when it comes to the program itself, everything is going well. But beyond writing articles, free software has always worked. On important questions such as how to make social networking sites safer for women or minors or to create a profitable debate or disseminate accurate information, free programs have not changed things at all – instead, it has been helpful, as Mastodon did. Social Truth.
In this sense, free software includes a list of “free” items – including markets and communications – that seek to solve problems by opening doors. With enough eyes for all the bugs and shallow, thinking goes, when the answer to bad speech is to talk too much, and people who put freedom before equality will receive the highest degree of both. Of course, these free ideas work best for their own ends, that is, to produce more resources or speeches or programs.
When Rochko first discovered that Gab was using Mastodon in 2019, it led to a major search. They did everything they could to separate Gab from other networks that use the app. One user of mastodon.social, a social networking site run by the Mastodon project, was pressed to hear more, he says, “I wonder how it is possible to have a LICENSE that explicitly prohibits its use in hate speech.” Rochko’s answer he was missing. He further added that in the process, they had failed to obtain contracts from the 600 funders at the time, so they needed everyone’s approval to change the license, and they wanted the protection of a free software program – “if someone violates AGPLv3, there are several established organizations that want to protect it. for which the cultural license does not benefit. “
What is the purpose of the license if it does not meet your expectations – to stop Donald Trump from using it to incite hatred and oppose democracy? We will not have the opportunity to see programs as a sport, taken away from reality. Code in one corner, another hate. If the past few years have taught us anything, it is that the two cannot be separated.
The old question, led by the use of Gab Mastodon, should be reconsidered: Why not get a ban on hate? Or those who insist on using computer software for evil purposes, such as money laundering and hate? In discussions with free software developers, I have granted permission for non-commercial use. This preparation can solve the Truth Social problem in minutes. And for a group of free software, it can be an important part of realizing how the code looks in the world.
[ad_2]
Source link
