While these people are extremely uninformed and their "solutions" would be absolutely catastrophic, they do have a point.
What they're noticing are the effects of corporatism: monopolies and other bad market practices caused by government regulation/meddling, often as a result of lobbying.
I'm talking about chemical patents and "safety regulations" making it practically impossible to compete with big pharma, making medicine extremely overpriced. Or government bailouts of banks which are long beyond bankruptcy causing all sorts of mishaps.
The only solution is a return to true capitalism. Career-politicians are just as guilty as (if not more than) the big corporations.
What is “true capitalism”? Specifically what time period and country are you talking about?
What “safety regulations” do you feel are harmful and need to be removed for the good of society?
What do you say to people who think this is complete nonsense? The “free market” wants to give me products filled with lead and asbestos, use my state’s rivers as their personal dumping grounds, and destroy indigineous people’s homelands so they can sell fossil fuels cheaper and destroy the planet faster. The “free market” wants low wage growth, a renter’s economy, and massive inequality. You’ll excuse me if I don’t believe that a magical invisible hand in some boardroom will look out for me.
The impression I get from people who talk about the free market is that they consider nothing besides the market itself and nothing besides the exchange of goods is important
Ah yes, true capitalism, that thing nobody ever tried before, much like the true communism we (as in humanity) never truly experienced - or so say my Trotskyist nemeses.
This is incorrect. Currently Truth is still internal software not available to the public, AGPL requires distribution of source code alongside the distribution of the program or service. Because Truth is only made available internally, the modified source code only has to be made available to their own company. This would change once the service does go public.
AGPL can also not be "permanently revoked". It's not individually licensed to each user like proprietary software often is, it's one license addressed to anyone. Furthermore the AGPL is explicitly irrevocable. They can change the license to a proprietary one but this does not affect existing copies under AGPL.
Last I'd like to touch on "antithetical values". If Mastodon were to discriminate against persons, groups or fields of endeavor in their license they would no longer meet the definition of open source, but rather become a source available proprietary product.
> AGPL can also not be "permanently revoked". It's not individually licensed to each user like proprietary software often is, it's one license addressed to anyone.
The license is addressed to anyone, but an individual user gets an individual license.
> Furthermore the AGPL is explicitly irrevocable.
The Mastodon authors can not choose to revoke the license, but the license itself contain clauses which specify revocation under certain conditions, and after a certain time delay. This is one of the areas in which the GPLv3 (and AGPLv3) is more lenient than the old GPLv2, which was automatically revoked instantly upon any license violation.
Revoke may not be the legally correct word to use, but it's an informal blog post and not a legal document, and what they intended to say is clear enough.
I think that your understanding of how the licensure works is a bit off. Open source software is still individually licensed to everyone. The copyright holder retains copyright, and can terminate an individual's rights under the license as long as the license includes a termination clause. Which the AGPL does.
I did not take termination into account in the second paragraph. I was referring to AGPL being addressed to anyone instead of a specific party. This means that a full revocation of the license would revoke it from everyone, even though that's not possible with AGPL. This does not apply to terminating licensees as you mentioned which appears to be what they mean and is possible under condition.
But because of the lack of a violation a permanent termination in 30 days would still be invalid.
Well, be careful there, too. "Revoke" means something specific in contract law. It sounds from the way you're talking that you're trying to use a more everyday definition of the term to understand this contract.
People seem to have found an undisclosed internal address and made accounts there. Would this be an instance of “distribution of the service” in lawyer terms?
That is false, the site was available to the public.
> Many users were able to create accounts and use it
> the AGPLv3 requires that you provide (to every user) an opportunity to receive the entire Corresponding Source for the website based on that code. These early users did not receive that source code
I can't help but feel like Bitcoin came full circle. They went from replacing to embracing the broken, corrupt traditional finance system.
The fact that the Bitcoin community is loving this with no pushback just shows that everyone who actually cares about the goal of cryptocurrency rather than profit in fiat has moved on to XMR or BCH.
Thought you might find this insightful. I agree with you on, not your keys not your crypto - this ETF is not the best option for many people, but for some it is perhaps their only and therefore best option: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/q6pwtp/michael_say...
Steam is pretty DRM free. Games have Steam integration which checks if your account owns the game, but they don't attempt to prevent tampering like true DRM does. If Steam were to disappear you could easily un-steam your games.
GOG also bans third party DRM software. It's great, but big publishers don't like that which is why GOG is mostly indie.
> If Steam were to disappear you could easily un-steam your games.
Speaking as someone who actually does this (because I despise the Steam client), it’s not easy. Different games need different Steam emulators to work, and titles that seem to run initially will break in weird ways mid-game.
It's a big list because there are a lot of games on Steam. However, the chance that any given Steam game in your library will be DRM Free is very small. I've also had cases in the past where I bought a game because it was on this list, but the list was seemingly wrong because the game had DRM.
I've actually had much better luck with the Epic Game Store, although it's seemingly not as good as it used to be.
yeah I'm also just waiting for nitter to break. but frankly by now I'm just there to follow @mntmn and the comments in their threads.
Deleting the account was actually what helped me break my twitter habit; without an account the UI is so annoying it works as an effective dopamine inhibitor.
anyhow, @mntmn is also on mastodon and MNT Research also run a cosy Discourse instance, so I'm welcoming this as twitter taking their place next to the facebooks, tumblrs amd myspaces in the ranks of self-obsoleted social media.
What they're noticing are the effects of corporatism: monopolies and other bad market practices caused by government regulation/meddling, often as a result of lobbying.
I'm talking about chemical patents and "safety regulations" making it practically impossible to compete with big pharma, making medicine extremely overpriced. Or government bailouts of banks which are long beyond bankruptcy causing all sorts of mishaps.
The only solution is a return to true capitalism. Career-politicians are just as guilty as (if not more than) the big corporations.