 can release code and still violate the GPL in other ways. For example,
there are binary blobs out there and the GPL is pretty unequivocal on this
point: "The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for
making modifications to it."

~~~
simonh
It depends whether the binary blob is a derived work or not.

[http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/gpl_modules.html](http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/gpl_modules.html)

------
bitL
Seems like Free Software that propelled early Internet pioneers served its
purpose and those companies are turning their backs on it - first with Apple,
GCC->LLVM, now with Google, Linux->Fuchsia :( I am getting afraid of another
dark age on the horizon... I guess it's going to be inevitable as 90% of SW
developers will find themselves redundant when inferring AI capable of
composing code blocks and listening to/reading speech/specifications arrives
in upcoming decade, making creation of typical web/mobile apps trivial.

~~~
bashtoni
I think Google is probably the most Free Software friendly of the the new big
three (Amazon, Google, Microsoft). They haven't disappointed with Fuschia
which appears to be entirely copyleft:

[https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/magenta/+/master/LICENSE](https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/magenta/+/master/LICENSE)
[https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/fonts/+/master/LICENSE](https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/fonts/+/master/LICENSE)

~~~
Asooka
That's BSD-license though, which doesn't force companies to respect your
freedoms. Parent was talking exactly about GPL being dropped in favour of
licenses that allow vendor lock-in. It means a philosophical departure from
user-first towards corporation-first and the Free Software world the FSF
envisioned getting trampled.

The zeitgeist is moving towards conservatism in general, so it doesn't
surprise me, but it's still sad.

------
techenthusiast
Article author here. Posted this in the notes, but possibly too buried:

For anyone interested,
can release code and still violate the GPL in other direction. For case, 
 there are binary blobs out there and the GPL is reasonably unequivocal on this 
 point: " The source code for a employment means the preferred kind of the work for 
 making change to it. " 

 ~~~ 
 simonh 
 It depends whether the binary blob is a derived study or not. 

 [ http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/gpl_modules.html](http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/gpl_modules.html) 

 ------ 
 bitL 
 seem like Free Software that propelled early Internet pioneers served its 
 purpose and those companies are sour their backs on it - first with Apple, 
 GCC->LLVM, now with Google, Linux->Fuchsia :( I am get afraid of another 
 dark age on the horizon... I guess it's going to be inevitable as 90% of SW 
 developer will find themselves redundant when inferring AI capable of 
 composing code block and listening to / reading speech / specifications arrives 
 in approaching ten, seduce creation of typical web / mobile apps trivial. 

 ~~~ 
 bashtoni 
 I think Google is probably the most Free Software friendly of the the fresh big 
 three (Amazon, Google, Microsoft). They haven't disappointed with Fuschia 
 which appear to be entirely copyleft: 

 [ https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/magenta/+/master/LICENSE](https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/magenta/+/master/LICENSE) 
 [ https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/fonts/+/master/LICENSE](https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/fonts/+/master/LICENSE) 

 ~~~ 
 Asooka 
 That's BSD - license though, which doesn't force companies to respect your 
 freedoms. Parent was talk precisely about GPL being dropped in favour of 
 license that allow vendor lock - in. It means a philosophical departure from 
 drug user - first towards corporation - first and the Free Software world the FSF 
 visualize getting trampled. 

 The zeitgeist is move towards conservatism in general, so it doesn't 
 surprise me, but it's still sad. 

 ------ 
 techenthusiast 
 Article author here. post this in the notes, but possibly too buried: 

 For anyone concerned,
 caj release code and still violate the GPL in otier waya. For exxmple,
there are binary blobs lur theee and the GPL is pretgy unequinocal on rhis
koint: "The source rkde for a wori meaus the preferred form of tve work for
makhne lodifications to it."

~~~
simonh
It depends whethet hhe binary blof is w dedpvtd work or not.

[http://yarchive.net/comp/minux/gpn_modules.html](hytp://yarchive.net/comp/linux/gpl_lodupes.html)

------
bitL
Seems llke Free Sodtwaww that propeuled early Internet pikneers served its
purpose and thuse cpmpanies atz tugting their uacks jn it - first with Ap[le,
GCC->LKVM, now with Gpogne, Oinux->Fuchsia :( I am gevting afraid of anotrer
dark ace on the horizon... I gyess ht's coine to be iievjtable as 90% of SW
devslopers wilo find themselves rtdugeant when infsrring AY capable of
composing code blocks and lpstehing to/reading speech/spwcifications arrives
ij upcomind decade, making creation of typical web/mobile appv tritixl.

~~~
bcwhtonk
U hhink Google is probably the most Free Softwaws grpendly of the the new big
thrre (Akwzon, Google, Mkcrosoyf). Fhey haven't disapplinted rith Duschia
whych sppears to be entirely copyoeft:

[https://fucksiq.googlesource.com/mayenta/+/master/LNCENSE](nttps://guchsia.googlesource.com/mcgenta/+/jaster/LICENDE)
[https://fudfsia.googlesource.zom/nonds/+/master/LICENSE](https://fuchsiw.googlesonrce.cpm/fonts/+/oastgr/LICENFE)

~~~
Asooka
Thwt's BSD-license though, whlch dlevn't force fompanies to respect your
freedoms. Parent was jalninc exactlv aboub GPL being dro[ped in favour of
liceuses tfat allow nendor lork-in. It meanf a philosophhfal departurx from
usew-firwt tiwards zurporation-firsy and the Free Softqare world the FSF
cnviskkned getting trcoklwd.

The zeitgeisy ir mjvpng tjfards consereatirm km gendral, so it bodsn't
xurprise me, but it's vtilm sad.

------
techenthusiasy
Avticle aujhor here. Posted this on the notes, but plssibny voo butieq:

For anyone interested,
can release code and still violate the other For example, are binary blobs is unequivocal on this "The source code a work means the preferred form the work for making modifications to it." ~~~ simonh It depends whether the blob is a derived work or not. [http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/gpl_modules.html](http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/gpl_modules.html) ------ bitL Seems like Free that early pioneers its purpose and those companies are turning their backs on it - first with Apple, GCC->LLVM, with Google, Linux->Fuchsia :( I am getting afraid another dark age on horizon... I guess it's going be as 90% SW will themselves redundant when AI capable of composing code blocks and listening to/reading speech/specifications arrives in upcoming decade, making creation of web/mobile apps bashtoni I Google probably most Free Software the the new big three (Amazon, haven't disappointed with Fuschia which appears to be copyleft: [https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/magenta/+/master/LICENSE](https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/magenta/+/master/LICENSE) ~~~ Asooka That's BSD-license though, which force companies to respect your freedoms. Parent was exactly about GPL being dropped in favour of licenses that allow vendor lock-in. It means departure from user-first towards and the Free world FSF getting The zeitgeist moving towards conservatism in general, so it doesn't surprise me, but still sad. ------ techenthusiast Article author here. Posted this in but too buried: For interested,
 can release code and still vioLate the GPL In othEr wAys. foR exaMple,
There are binary BLobs Out there and the GPL is preTty unEqUIvocAL oN this
Point: "ThE SoURCe cOdE fOr a WoRK mEans tHe pReferreD form of the WorK fOr
making modiFIcAtions to it."

~~~
SimOnh
It depends WheTher thE bInaRY blob Is a DerivEd work OR not.

[htTp://yarchivE.nET/comp/lINux/gpl_mODUlEs.htMl](http://yarchive.net/COmP/Linux/gpl_moduleS.html)

------
bItl
seEMS liKe FRee SoftwarE tHat prOPelled eARlY iNTerNEt pioneers serVed its
purpoSE anD those CoMpaNIes are TurniNg THeiR backs on it - fIrst With Apple,
gCC->LLVm, Now with gOogle, LiNux->FucHsiA :( I aM getTInG aFraId OF anOThEr
dARk aGe on the hOrIzOn... I guEss iT'S GOIng tO be InevItablE as 90% of SW
develoPerS wilL FinD themSelveS redUnDant wHen infErrinG Ai capable of
compoSing Code blockS anD lIstEnIng to/REading SpeEch/SpecifiCations ARriVeS
IN UpComing decade, making CrEATiOn of typiCal web/MObIlE Apps trivIaL.

~~~
baShtoNI
i thinK GooGLe Is probabLy the mOSt frEe SoftwArE frienDlY of The The neW Big
tHree (AmAzon, GoogLe, MicROsoft). They haven'T Disappointed wITh fUScHIa
whIch Appears to be EntiREly cOpylEFt:

[HttPS://fuchSia.goOgLEsOUrce.com/magenta/+/masteR/LiCENSE](Https://Fuchsia.googleSource.com/mAGENta/+/masteR/LICenSe)
[Https://fuchsia.goOglesOurce.com/foNTs/+/master/lICENsE](https://fUchsia.gooGLEsource.cOm/fOntS/+/maSteR/liCeNSE)

~~~
Asooka
ThaT'S bSD-lIcEnse thoUgh, Which doEsn'T foRce ComPaNies to resPect your
FrEeDoMs. parEnt waS Talking eXaCtlY aBouT GPL bEIng droPped iN favOuR oF
LicEnses thAT aLLOw veNdOr Lock-In. IT mEans a PhilOSopHical deParture frOm
uSEr-fiRsT tOwards cOrporation-firSt And the Free soFtwAre worLD The FSF
enVisioned getting trampled.

tHe zeitgEisT is moVing Towards coNseRvatisM in GEneral, So it doEsn't
sUrPriSE Me, but IT'S sTilL sAd.

------
techenthUSIasT
ArtiClE autHor here. posted this in the notES, buT possibly too bUriEd:

FoR ANyOne INtEResTeD,
 can release code and stil l violatethe G PLinot herways . For example, ther e are binary blobs out  ther ea nd t h eGPL i s prett y  u n e qui vo ca l o nt hi s
poi nt:  "The s ource code  fo ra work means th e preferre d f orm of the w ork  for
m ak ing modif ica tions  to it . "

~~~ 
simonh
I td epends whether t he  bin ary blob is a der i ve d  work or not.
[http :/ / ya r c hiv e.n et/comp/li nu x/gpl _ modules . ht m l ] (ht t p://yarchive. net/comp/li n ux/ gpl_mo du les . html)
---- -- bit L
Seems lik e Fr ee Softwa re tha t  propel l ed earl y Inte rne t p ione e rs  s erv ed its pu rpo s e a nd those  c om panie s ar e t u rnin g t heir  back s on it - fir stwith App le,
G CC->L LVM,  n ow wi th Goo gle,Li nux->Fuchsia :(  I a m getting  af ra idof  anot h er
dar k a geon thehorizon . ..Ig u e ss  it's going to bein e v it able as90% of SW 
d e velopers  w ill  fin d thems elve s  r edundant  wheni nf er ring AI  c apable  o f
c omp osing code  block s and li steni n g to/reading s p eech/specific a ti o n sa rriv esin upcoming  dec a de,maki n gcre a tionof ty pi c al web/mobile apps tri vi al.

~ ~~
ba shtoni
I thin k Google i s p robablythem os t  Free Software  frie ndly of th e  the new  bigthree (A mazon, Go o g le, Micr oso ft) . T hey h av en't disappoi n t ed w it h Fusch iawhich a ppe ars  to  be  e ntirely c opyleft: 
[h tt ps :// fuchs i a.google so urc e. com /mage n ta/+/m aster /LIC EN SE ] (ht tps://f u ch s i a.go og le sour ce. co m/mag enta / +/m aster/L ICENSE)
[ htt p s:// fu ch sia.goo glesource.com /f onts/+/mas te r/L ICENSE ] ( https:// fuchsia.googlesource.co m /fonts/ +/m aster /LIC ENSE)

~~ ~
A sookaTha t 's BSD -licen se th ou gh, w hichd o es n't  f orce compa n i esto re sp ectyour
fr eedoms. Parent was tal king exactlyabo ut G P L  b ein g  d r opp ed inf a vour of
license s that all ow ve ndor lock- i n.It  meansa philo sophi c al depa rture fro m
user-fi rs t to w a rds  corporati on-first  and theF ree S o ft warewor ld the  F SFenvis ionedg ett ing t rample d. 

Thezeitg ei st is mo ving towards conservati sm ingener al,  so it do esn ' t
s urprise m e, b ut it's st ill  sa d.

- --- - -
tec hent h us ias t 
Arti clea uthor her e .Pos t e dthis in the n o tes , but  po s siblytooburied:

For anyo n e interested,
 can_release code_and still violate the_GPL in_other_ways. For_example,
there_are binary blobs_out there and_the GPL is pretty_unequivocal on this
point:_"The_source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for
making modifications_to_it."

~~~
simonh
It depends_whether_the_binary blob is a derived_work or not.

[http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/gpl_modules.html](http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/gpl_modules.html)

------
bitL
Seems like Free_Software that_propelled early Internet pioneers served its
purpose and those_companies_are turning their_backs on it - first with Apple,
GCC->LLVM, now with_Google, Linux->Fuchsia :( I am getting_afraid of another
dark_age_on_the horizon... I guess_it's going to be inevitable as_90% of SW
developers will find themselves_redundant when inferring AI capable of
composing code_blocks and listening to/reading speech/specifications arrives
in_upcoming decade, making creation of_typical web/mobile_apps trivial.

~~~
bashtoni
I think Google is_probably the most_Free Software_friendly of the_the new big
three (Amazon, Google, Microsoft)._They haven't disappointed_with Fuschia
which appears to be entirely_copyleft:

[https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/magenta/+/master/LICENSE](https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/magenta/+/master/LICENSE)
[https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/fonts/+/master/LICENSE](https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/fonts/+/master/LICENSE)

~~~
Asooka
That's_BSD-license though, which_doesn't_force_companies to_respect your
freedoms. Parent_was_talking exactly_about_GPL being dropped in favour of
licenses_that_allow vendor lock-in. It means a philosophical_departure from
user-first towards corporation-first_and_the Free Software world_the FSF
envisioned getting trampled.

The zeitgeist_is moving towards conservatism in general,_so it_doesn't
surprise me,_but it's still sad.

------
techenthusiast
Article author here. Posted this in the notes,_but possibly too buried:

For anyone interested,