Diane is a user on octodon.social. You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse. If you don't, you can sign up here.

Fun fact: when I was a freshman in college I thought my most useful contribution to free software (I was not a programmer at the time) would be to make a webcomic about two people mod'ing their house and it turning it into what we would now call a "hackerspace" (that term didn't exist then) where the whole house was slowly automated (IoT didn't exist then either). I never finished it or even got what we would call "far" at all.

But you can still find it... not that it's good...

@cwebber you might be interested in this little project of a friend of mine: glider.ink/

@rysiek I guess since you linked your thing, I'll link my awful unfinished comic lingocomic.com/comic.php?index

The one thing I'm proud of about it was the level of experimentation I was doing at the time in each page. It did influence a lot of my future artwork and experiments.

Part of the reason I never finished it was "imposter syndrome" though I didn't know the term at the time. I was afraid I didn't understand the tech I was describing enough. The upside is I started learning more...

@rysiek But really, for *years* I thought I would come back to it and this would be my major life's work.

Time changes you...

@rysiek Also I'm super, super embarassed to see I had an *NC* license at the time. Gak!

@Shamar @cwebber

The problem with the NC is that it's counter-productive and does not achieve what artists want it to achieve.

It does nothing to stop people who do not care about licensing from "stealing" your work.

OTOH it stops people who feel strongly about licensing from using your work, making derivatives, making it popular.

It's terribly vague -- what does it even mean? If I use this CC By-NC picture in a presentation funded by a grant, is that "commercial"?

CC By-SA is way better.

@rysiek @Shamar Nobody agrees on what "noncommercial" means, and you will either block uses you want or be surprised to hear that others consider uses you feel should be prohibited they believe are allowed. Worse yet: noncommercial licenses don't compose. What happens when 100 entities later contribute to a noncommercial license, if they hope to enforce it as a revenue stream?

"noncommercial" licenses always fail.

@cwebber @rysiek @Shamar

I'm gearing up to release what I've written thus far on the web under a CC license, and I'm going with BY-SA-NC because I don't expect people to write fanfic based on my setting or adapt my work for other media, and if they do I sure as hell don't want them making money off it without coming to me first and offering me a piece of the action.

@starbreaker @cwebber @Shamar so, disclaimer: obviously I do not want to go and tell you what to do.


1. "I can't imagine people doing anything with X" is something I've seen in debates about Open Data (government officials saying "who would do anything with X kind of data?"), copyright, art, etc. Each time it turned out that indeed there would be people doing something.

@starbreaker @cwebber @Shamar ...Here's my favorite example: youtube.com/watch?v=lsReygHnXA

This exists, because everyone from Linux kernel devs, through webserver devs, through OSM devs, up to OSM editors released stuff on open licenses. Nobody had this outcome in mind, and yet here we are.

I feel it makes sense to not limit the potential, not limit the possibilities, with an NC license.

@rysiek @starbreaker @Shamar Notably the Linux kernel itself was originally under a noncommercial license and that changed.

Imagine how much worse the world would be if the Linux kernel were under NC!

@cwebber @rysiek @Shamar

Tempted to say that maybe BSD would have taken over instead, but IIRC when Linux first came out BSD was still under legal threat.

@kaniini @starbreaker @rysiek @cwebber

This is something I have to reflect upon.

I'm under the impression that commercial exploitation destroys anything good that comes from hacking.

Linux included.

At times, I'd like a license stricter then AGPL for my code, just to protect it from "the market".

And I refuse to accept that being commercial is the only way to be useful to people. That's the ethics of Capitalism, and I don't like it.

@Shamar @kaniini @starbreaker @rysiek I'm skeptical of and concerned about commercial exploitation too. Problem is, "noncommercial" doesn't fix the things you'll expect it to, and will prevent things you want.

Here's a question: if Linux were noncommercial, should a community run nonprofit be legally allowed to run it in a commercially run hosting service / datacenter? Even if the hosting service profits from it? Can the cooperative collect dues?

@cwebber @Shamar @kaniini @starbreaker @rysiek

Have you seen the peer production license? wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Peer_Pr

I think its a bit better than a blanket NC license. What I really want is a license requiring income from a commercial entity be used to improve the software. Either by spending time working on it, or paying for others time.

@alienghic @Shamar @kaniini @starbreaker @rysiek I think the Peer Production License is a license with good intents and good people that is unfortunately doomed like every other NC approach

@cwebber @Shamar @kaniini @starbreaker @rysiek

So far the hybrid GPL/commerical license seems to be the most likely to generate funding for developers while still being "Free software"

@alienghic @Shamar @kaniini @starbreaker @rysiek by that I assume you mean copyleft with proprietary relicensing?

It has some problems sometimes but I'm generally good with it. :)

Diane @alienghic

@cwebber @Shamar @kaniini @starbreaker @rysiek

Yes I've seen Qt and the Ada compilers use it. Either your end product is GPL or you pay us.

· Web · 0 · 0