Comments by "Anony Mousse" (@anon_y_mousse) on "Truth Behind Ballmer And "Linux Is A Cancer"" video.

No, it's not, and that would be horrible if it were.
3
@billj5645 Linux isn't UNIX, and more importantly is just the kernel for an OS, so anyone can use it incorrectly and cause headaches for less capable users. If the devices in question used an unaltered copy of Linux and built a full distribution around it in the correct manner, you'd have no problems with the software as I and many other desktop Linux users are well aware. The only real problems are hardware manufacturers refusing to publish specs and/or open their drivers, which if open would net them more money because more people would be capable of buying and using their hardware.
2
It could be argued that MIT is a more free license as the user can do basically anything they want with the code. I would argue that more freedom isn't necessarily good in this case, but the GPL does restrict you in a bad way. Sure, you can work around it if you really need to use that code by componentizing the GPL'd code you use, but that's a restriction that you might not want to have to comply with and is arguably onerous.
2
@sparky8251 Except the user can make changes and sell it as a closed source piece of software, something that the developer can also do, so I don't think we have the same ideas about freedom.
2
@lawrencedoliveiro9104 Yeah, I would argue that SaaS is a cancer and should be resisted by everyone, even corporations that benefit from it as a model.
2
@Theoldenmage Because communism always ends the same way, the death of all the cogs and the elites eat the remains.
2
@priyapepsi I know, you're one of those sheep that actually believes it will work, that it hasn't really been tried before, that what killed 120 Million people in the past century wasn't "real" communism. Don't worry, it'll be tried again and you won't be one of the elites to see the failed fruits of your pointless labor.
2
@annieworroll4373 Indeed, and I would argue that it shouldn't be limited as anyone that buys a copy of the software should have access to the source code.
2
@tylerdean980 I disagree with the reasoning there. Consider that MS has used GPL code without reciprocating, as evidenced by the leaked XP code, and others could easily do the same. Also note that MS and Apple have both released a lot of code as open source, albeit with a non-GPL license, that others have made use of. With the right promotion, and a better license, i.e. not GPL or BSD or MIT or Apache, Linux could have been a bigger deal and everyone would be using it today instead of the tiny fraction that are.
2
@tylerdean980 I disagree with that interpretation of forcing "cooperation", but definitely agree that in nearly all other spaces Linux did win out, but unfortunately most don't know or care what runs those devices anymore than their desktop computer. Also, I didn't say someone violating license restrictions was a flaw in the license, although the lack of enforcement isn't a good thing. However, Google has been working on a replacement for Linux in Android and if that happens all of those mobile devices will no longer be market share for Linux. Regardless, I would argue that what is needed, at the very least, is for more people to be informed about the things they use. It's just a matter of how to go about educating them.
2
Legally they are obligated as they've used a lot of GPL code contrary to license restrictions, but they can get away with it because of corruption.
1
@notuxnobux That's why ESR would've been the better leader for the movement.
1
If by control you mean that they have access to the source, then I completely agree with that. However, I don't believe that necessarily precludes proprietary software as they can distribute source to those that pay for the software and allow buyers to use it in perpetuity as well as make changes as they see fit. The license can restrict what the buyer does with the source, such as not redistributing it, and I'd be fine with that being a stipulation even to the government, as long as they have the source and audit it for security's sake.
1
@angeldude101 Either way, neither is a good thing.
1