|
Top-level
@LaF0rge Companies pay their employees to contribute to FOSS if and only if it benefits the companies in some way. Russian defense contractors don't contribute to Linux out of the goodness of their hearts. Letting them keep contributing means they keep benefiting The people that work for these companies but contribute in their free time don't have my sympathy too. Their day job is still building the tools to kill innocent people, and if all that costs them is their hobby then they got off easy 5 comments
 @LaF0rge @AdrianVovk That is still the mantra and why they don't censor Palantir, Rheinmetall, Lockheed ... @larsmb @AdrianVovk do you have any references to laws that prevent the public debate about sanctions? Since when can we not debate and question or even challenge public policy? @LaF0rge @AdrianVovk Sure, we can and should. But I don't see that as a decision the LF and its associates could have done any different, given that they're bound by law. @LaF0rge @AdrianVovk And very few orgs indeed will come clean with "well the government asked us to so we can continue to get their money". (I need to add a disclaimer here that this is my very personal take, not representative of or informed by my employer, where I'm not in the loop about such decisions anyway.) |
Gregory's Server
@AdrianVovk the freedom of FOSS is the freedom to use it for any purpose. I never really liked that, but licenses that would discriminate against certain use cases [like military] are neither compliant to free software definition nor open source definition. For decades that was the mantra.