(This thread is a fork of "Re: [solved]: vi: How to display German umlauts?")
On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 01:46:55PM +0200, Michael Hekeler wrote: > Dear Anon Loli: > > > (...) > > software should be free, and non-personal information should be free, > > too, without any IP or a requirement for a file "LICENSE".. those are > > just my 2 cents.. > > if you don't say something about using or redisributing your software or > code then nobody knows and noone can be sure if its allowed to do this > or that. > Just to make it clear for everyone you can give a statement about these > topics. > A good place for this statement is to include a file and call it > LICENSE. Yeah, a statement indeed, but I'm not sure how I feel about copyright itself like I don't feel that taking someone's code and not giving them credit for it is stealing or something like that.. no one can own code, they can just come up with a cool combination of code, but that shouldn't mean that everyone HAS TO credit them (if not more) or else they get removed from an platform or sued. For example a couple of years ago I predicted that an A.I. will be invented that comes up with combinations of code, and checks for copyright (how does it do that? IDK) and if it doesn't exists, then it licenses it for a few dollars, and does this until everyone is legally forced to pay to have any functionality (this is as far as I understand it would play out). Like a year ago when A.I. became popular, someone made a bot that helps programmers with code and stuff.. someone else made an A.I. that can write code based on the input (is not ChatGPT or MS' A.I. capable of doing this?) Even if such mass-licensing is say forbidden, I still don't feel like someone should get credit if their code is out there, let alone asked if their code can be used or not.. this is how I feel because I would feel the same if someone did this to me. If you don't want your code out there, then don't publish it.. it's better than this evil capitalistic and selfish "code sharing", which is more bullshit+licensing evil than it is good, in my opinion. When I'm selfish like that, for example with my current projects, I just don't publish the source code, because I feel like someone else would work on the code instea dof me... and I want to be the one fulfilling ... LIVING my wishes :) > > (...), would you use a open source peace of software that in the README > > says "you can use it for whatever you want with no strings attached, > > and that's it > > In the end it is your decision. Whether you want to hide the text > down in the README or something else. > If you are the creator, it's your work and your rules apply. Yeah, but at the same time I'm not sure I want to create something that only 3 people in the world will use XD I wonder how OpenBSD stands with using code that has a weak disclaimer like "You're free to use this for whatever you want with 0 conditions because I'm not evil or annoying" in it's README, and for code that I "borrowed"(xD) from someone else and/or modified, I could maybe, just maybe put a disclaimer or something but even that is a big pain in my cunny... Because like ideally I want to be like suckless.org guys... BUT I also like OpenBSD and wouldn't mind one day for OpenBSD to perhaps use some code for something, even if it's just 1 line > > I'm not sure about the license thought... as I despise licenses and even > > having > > a copyleft license like CC is getting on my nerves, ... > > creative commons (CC) recommend against using their licenses > for software. > Very similar to most Creative Commons licenses are Permissive software > licenses (e.g. Apache 2.0 License or MIT License) > But here again: if it is your work then you decide the ways share your work. I meant CC0 specifically Intellectual Property is such a evil that it affects humanity as a whole Wasn't like 3D printing a huge patent for like 70 decades? I think that you get the drift :)
