logoalt Hacker News

__rito__today at 2:07 AM4 repliesview on HN

If this is not bad faith argument, then I don't what is. When someone is violating an OSS licence, they are doing it for commercial gains and monetary profit. Nobody is angry at someone using FOSS software for himself with no money getting involved.

As opposed to that, books, movies are pirated for personal consumption. Not monetary gains. If someone bought a $30 book, and then ran a BaaS with millions of VC money in his pocket, people in HN would be angry at him, too.


Replies

pruppytoday at 5:04 AM

Now that AI is decimating a lot of bullshit jobs we need a basic income of some kind. A universal one.

That would enable the authors, activists and hackers to pursue what's meaningful, instead of the profit of the multinational leeches that do not need to adhere to laws, borders or taxes.

If a zillion dollar corporations (Meta and the likes) can torrent Annas Archive and decimate the copyrights I see it a moral imperative for the people to do the same and spare the pennies that would profit the publishing / media / ... industries to support the authors directly, instead of the trickle up method, where majority goes in to the hands of the dystopican narcissist zillionaire.

show 2 replies
altmanaltmantoday at 5:44 AM

Anthropic, OpenAI and Meta: yeah totally, personal consumption only

jmyetoday at 2:30 AM

[dead]

NeutralCranetoday at 2:34 AM

If knowledge is to be free, that means there should be no restrictions on how it is used. Even an open source license misses the point, because the implication is still that one person can dictate how another person can make use of knowledge. It’s still premised on the same dystopian view that a person can own an idea.

show 6 replies