Post #1763926
2026-04-26 09:57 UTC
Replies (4)
-
@SRAZKVT@tech.lgbt 2026-04-26 20:29
@DLC same as any other mit project, either it's a corporation aiming to disrupt and gain power in a specific niche, or people who got fed propaganda about how permissive licenses is better than copyleft licenses
-
@meluzzy@woof.tech 2026-04-26 20:51
@DLC That's a good question. If I had to guess I would go for the common misconception of: - "MIT is less restrictive so It gives more freedom". And the fallacy: - "The more freedom the more fair; the more fair the more moral". All of this just to end up with the so common result of: "They took my code and bundled it into a private toolchain used to [insert the most unethical use possible] and they are harming thousands of people with it while making a profit" This is often done with the objective of performing the following "flex" maneuver in their CVs: "The code I wrote for my library ended up being used by [evil company] and thats amazing!" > Remember folks that some people were indoctrinated into thinking that serving evil companies is something to be proud of. Such are the wonders of "Freedom as in MIT"
-
@caleb@hachyderm.io 2026-04-26 22:00
@DLC if this is a reference to uutils/coreutils, I don't think a lot of thought went into it. The repo got the MIT licence added in the first commit in **2013** https://github.com/uutils/coreutils/commit/d4e96b33e343733992fad55ac840c9649cd72ede
-
@m@social.rcelko.ch 2026-04-30 04:54
@DLC Reality of usage?