i’d argue its better for software to max foss license like AGPL, not bsd that can be taken out by companies

You sound like someone i know xD

But I think gpl isn’t limited to software, or is it ? Anyhow, you have different varaites of Create Commons, depending on much limits you put, from 0(nothing) to 4(no commercial use, no remix etc.) they have license chooser on website here

They can put as much ads as they wan’t they will be blocked, and there always will be a way to block them.

Competition is useless, better to have federated networks and do videos for profit and find other ways to pay for content to support content creators if they need support. Block ads everywhere, work in those fields is better than calling for competition and creating competitor that will win over google and become new google.

There will be adblocker to block this also don’t worry.

Yeah I’m not for UBI that much, and don’t see anyone working towards global VAT. I was comparing that worry about AI that is gonna destroy humanity is not possible, it’s just scifi.

It replaced content writers, replacing digital artists, replacing programmers. In a sense they fire unexeprieced ones because ai speeds up those with more experience.

Fair point, but AI is part of it, I mean it exists in capitalist system. This AI Singularity apocalypse is like not gonna happen in 99%, AI within capitalism will affect us badly.

just wait until you hear about humans.txt, it really exitst here

Ah, AI doesn’t pose as danger in that way. It’s danger is in replacing jobs, people getting fired bc of ai, etc.

I don’t think companies care, I said > I don’t think companies can do that actually. It is very regulated area.

What I’m arguing for in favor of nuclear power sources is that is cleanest source of energy we have from all and least deadly from all. But the reasons we can’t have it on the entire world scale are in short, capitalism. Politics + oil/coal lobby.

What ? One poster in comments said they are getting power from reactor that is same model as Chernobyl one with added improvments and nothing bad happened, I don’t get what you mean by “when they’re in production” ?

Are you arguing that coal is safer than nuclear ?

As far as the smog goes that was before catalytic converters and improved laws to reduce smog

Then take into account modern nuclear reactors, as other commenters said. Nuclear is the way to go for safest and cleanest energy of all energy sources we have. Things that are stopping it are coal/oil lobby, nuclear scare and capitalists and politicians scared other countries might make nuclear bomb out of it.

I’d love to have a nuclear powerplant in my country, we are choking here because of coal and coal lobby just makes things worse by supporting energy sources sold as “renewable clean sources” that need batteries to work on and as a fallback, when there is less sun or wind always go back to coal.

The other ones don’t fail catastrophically like nuclear does.

take a look some excerpts:

December 1952: The Great Smog of London caused by the burning of coal, and to a lesser extent wood, killed 12,000 people within days to months due to inhalation of the smog.[18]

The Vajont Dam in Italy overflew. Filling the reservoir caused geological failure in valley wall, leading to 110 km/h landslide into the lake; water escaped in a wave over the top of dam. Valley had been incorrectly assessed as stable. Several villages were completely wiped out, with an estimated between 1,900 and 2,500 deaths.

as /u/afraid_of_zombies said:

All other energy techs are allowed to have problems and produce waste except for one.

I don’t think companies can do that actually. It is very regulated area. Also I think there is a lot of nuclear scare going on. Nuclear is not at all dangerous as it most people think, it just sounds scary.

At present we have oil and coal companies that are responsible for a lot of deaths and burning the planet. Nuclear is in no way near ammount of damage coal and oil are making right now. So even with nuclear accidents(sounds scary yea) it’s better than coal and oil.

here you go - you can archive.is to bypass paywalls

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html

Don’t know who is ignorant here. Open source is bad term to be used, coopted by big tech, end of story.

That it does

Yeah, I could put more thought into this meme, but it is what it is. When I get time I’ll remake it.

Google, Meta and Microsoft are bad. Yes they are.

But I’m good. I want to dictate who can use open-source software and how!

If I’m good or bad is not the issue here. And I’m not dicatating anything. I don’t really get what you want to say ?

So I guess my question to you use, how does a corporation making money from something it shares with the public negatively impact you?

For example email,now it’s very dificult to self host email and not get caught with spam filter dictated by big tech. Entire internet really, before we had personal websites, community forums then reddit came and take over the forums making profit of off it. There are many examples. It is true that this techno landscape now is mirror image of relations we have in our society, rich getting richer and exploint poorer, in most banal sense. In linux they put/or are putting in subscription system to unlock cpu cores only if you pay, even when you bought processor.

Look around more and you can find a lot of other examples, one more is EEE(embrace, extend, extinguis) of xmpp.

People seem to appreciate companies very much, even getting glad that “great meta is using activitypub with threads and we are all gonna be happy”, in reality we won’t. They will just co-opt fediverse and EEE it.

Me personally am on most FOSS hardvare and software I can be on this moment. If I find time to make feaseble to use more FOSS stuff and get away from all the corpos I will do that for sure. But only me, and small ammount of people going that way is not the solution. It has to be mass movement to ditch the corpos once and for all.