Comments by "Gilad Barlev" (@GSBarlev) on "Truth Behind Ballmer And "Linux Is A Cancer"" video.

  1. - SaaS has an explicit carve-out in GPLv3 (it's ambiguous in GPLv2), which is why Affero exists. Put another way: if you do not distribute the binary, you don't have to distribute the source. - Arguably, if your application doesn't directly use a GPL component but, say, makes a call to an interface that could be implemented by a permissive or even proprietary library, then you don't have to license your application, only make the source code of the GPL component available if you ship the binary. This is explicit in LGPL, but Google v. Oracle should swing both ways (an interface is not subject to copyright).
    3
  2. Hot take: CC-NC is more damaging to the "open source" movement than MIT or Beerware style licenses. As a creator it seems perfectly reasonable to say, "Hey, I don't want anyone else to profit off my work" but imagine if OBS were licensed exclusively under non-commercial terms--that could very well mean that no VOD or Streaming creator could use it if they stood to earn a penny of ad revenue. To be clear, OBS is GPLv2, but that's probably a more familiar example to most people than the MIT/BSD-licensed projects I could name off the top of my head.
    2
  3. Let's also give a shout-out to companies like CodeWeavers and Anaconda, which do almost exclusively open source development that is either sponsored by companies like Valve or paid for and stress-tested through contracts with companies and users who might be entitled to a dual-license / copyleft exemption.
    2
  4. I will bet you a dollar that when Microsoft retires the NT kernel, they'll switch to using the Linux* kernel. Now, NT may be around for another five years or fifty, but I don't see Microsol developing another kernel. *Imagine if they didn't and adopted XNU or, even more hilariously, HURD!
    1
  5. lol, imagine a world where every weapons targeting system and nuclear weapon schematic were public domain... I mean, I'm not against it per se...
    1
  6.  @arthurmoore9488  Can something be "confidential" and still public domain? That's the issue I was responding to.
    1
  7. 5:30 "Back then" nothing--my previous employer as recently as 2018 wouldn't allow us to use any GPL libraries because of IP fears, even if it was an internal-facing product, and even if it was GPLv3 which explicitly carves out a source code exception for SaaS (hence the need for Affero).
    1