358
Root access vulnerability in glibc library impacts many Linux distros (securityaffairs.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/linux@lemmy.ml
79 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)
[deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    But the licence is chosen by the software author - unless that right to choose is taken away by a viral licence like the GPL, of course. In any case, I licence everything I write that I can as 3-clause BSD because I don't give a fuck. I wrote the software for me, and it costs me nothing if it's used by a shitty proprietary software stealer, or a noble OSS developer. Neither of them are paying me.

    OSS should, is, and eventually will drive for-pay software to extinction, and it should do it through merit, not some legal trickery.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [+] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Lastly, although free alternatives are often technically superior to their closed-source competitors, at the end of the day

    I am 100% in agreement with you here. While I'm not by any means a Libertarian, I prefer MIT and BSD licenses because they are truely free. The GPL is not: it removes freedoms. Now, you argue that limiting freedom can be a net good - we limit the freedom to rape and murder, and that's good. I don't agree that the freedoms the GPL removes are equivalent, and can indeed be harmful.

    I don't mind others using the GPL, but I won't.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •