Linux

14869 readers

197 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

Ategon@programming.dev

anzo@programming.dev

dwraf_of_ignorance@programming.dev

682

Debian developer Antoine Le Gonidec resigns after option allowing corporate LLM use without disclosure wins vote (lists.debian.org)

submitted 3 days ago by ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net to c/linux@programming.dev

353 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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

[–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 2 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (2 children)

The GPL gives you the right to access and modify the source code of software you use. A lack of copyrights does not mean that the creators have to share the source code with you. In fact, it means that anyone can take GPL software and turn it into closed source software

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago

Sure but that's mostly irrelevant in practice now. Gpl was notoriously unenforced so this aspect of "getting source code" almost never yielded to much in practice. FSF did a great job with limited resources it has but as code copyright is basically gone now and reverse engineering is so accessible we can actually empower real free software that is fully transparent and verifiable. If you imply that somehow we'll start regressing existing tools to proprietary software I don't see that at all.

[–] khleedril@cyberplace.social 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

@fruitcantfly @drmoose Just. Wrong. Clearly 'Linux boosted' is a worthless accolade.

[–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 1 points 22 hours ago

What is "Just. Wrong"? And what does the label "Linux boosted" have to do with this?