Mano, não sei se foi intencional ou não, mas aqui é uma instância internacional, meio que não vão interagir por não ser em inglês. Tem o !tecnologia@lemmy.eco.br que é de uma instância 100% BR.

Yeah, but there’s also the term “freeware”, which means closed source but free to use.

I’ll edit my comment for clarity, thanks for the heads up.

Projects leaching on the work of companies like that, “freeing the code”.

You mean it the other way, right? Because these companies you defend use the free labor of voluntary developers from the community, which spend hours and hours developing features, fixing bugs and what not, directly or indirectly. That’s how open source works.

When these companies change the project license to a closed source one, they’re basically saying a big “f*** you” to the community. Forking the latest open source version of the repository is nothing more than an effort to keep things the way they were.

huge companies will not pay a cent for Linux in the future

Linux is FOSS, you can do whatever you want with it as long as you redistribute it without modifying the license. Android does that; every GNU/Linux distribution does that. That’s how it works.

if a license says “you can use it for free, but need to share profits over x$”

What you’re describing is “freeware”, what this post is discussing is " open source software". There’s a giant gap between the two.

I think they mean EA Anti-Cheat, not Easy Anti-Cheat. The former, which is used in 2042, does not run under linux (and probably never will).

BFV runs out-of-the-box on linux systems and has a “Gold” rating on ProtonDB. If EA really goes on with this, BFV will become unplayable, just like 2042.

suddenlycaralho

“When education is not liberating, the dream of the opressed is to become the oppressor”

~ Paulo Freire

I don’t think its about posting actual news, but to have something they can monetise through ads.

The destroyer of toilets

Yeah, it doesn’t add up. Why would one go to the restricted access distributor if they can get a lot more by pirating?

Why can’t we have nice things? These people are literally just archiving and preserving old media, and if I recall correctly, they have strict rules of sharing these archived media.

I kinda understand why they got sued by Wiley/HarperCollins due to breaking the rules of sharing unlimited copies of archived books, but this time it doesn’t look like it.

Honestly, I hope Internet Archive survives all these lawsuits they’re dealing with

Best I can do is an unregulated submarine deep in the ocean

Sorry if it sounded rude (and yeah, it was kind of a rant, sorry). What I’m trying to say is: these people do much worse things and don’t bother to say “sorry” publicly. The only way to make them behave is to fine them by a huge amount, just like Norway did.

I’m against the trained models being used for profit with no credit or cut given to the humans who trained it.

Sorry mate, hell’s gonna get cold before this happens. We’re talking about the biggest moth******ers on earth since always. Do you think Meta/[insert big tech company name here] will start to behave all of the sudden? These people literally KILL people everyday for a profit (looking at you Instagram).

The only way to get something from these scumbags is fining them something like 100k per hour, until they start respecting people’s privacy

No problem with proprietary alternatives at all, it just feels contradictory to use such thing in a FOSS environment

They probably don’t, but they have families to feed, so it’s better to follow the guidelines and lie to a bunch of anonymous people on the internet rather than have your wife and kids beating you up after losing your job due to “not being evil enough”

None of these corporations can be trusted at all IMO, simply because they’re corporations in the first place, and WILL always choose what’s better for them rather than what’s better for the community. That’s why I advocate for open source every time I can.

And OK, everything you said is true and valid, but go ahead and try to convice the non-tech people to delete their accounts, while explaining all the little comforts they have will be taken away with it. They’ll simply laugh at you and carry on. That’s how Google and other corporations that follow this “free services” model got so big and influential, and now they’re using their size to do what corporations do: increase profits.

Another problem with this model is you can’t really tell what Google is doing with the data they collect. Can you/anybody tell Google didn’t feed their Bard AI data they collected from you? Can you/anybody tell Google ain’t using your/their data for anything except showing targeted ads? AFAIK, you can’t. Even if they update their ToS regularly, communicate you they’ve changed it and “if you continue using the service it means you agreed with the new Terms of Service”, do you really think people will actually take the time to read the same 20 page ToS every time it changes? Most people I know don’t even read it the first time!

In the end, you may say they’re being as ethical as possible, and the users are simply too lazy and everything bad that happens to them is entirely their own fault. You wouldn’t be wrong at all, but that’s not how the world works.

Also, sorry for the wall of text.