davout
Legendary
Online
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1008
1davout
|
|
January 19, 2011, 05:46:00 PM |
|
I happen to like the GPL. It's a big, beautiful fuck-you to the entire copyright system. That said, I see nothing wrong with the MIT license for the "official" Bitcoin client. Anyone who wants a GPL Bitcoin client badly enough can just take the source code for 0.3.19, make some changes, give his version a different name, and release it under the GPL. No more butthurt.
Licensing and copyright are orthogonal. +1 for the rest
|
|
|
|
FatherMcGruder
|
|
January 19, 2011, 06:02:02 PM |
|
GPL = Communism Only to the same extent of copyright. Licensing and copyright are orthogonal. Not so with copyleft. The whole idea, or at least a big part of it, is to exploit overly extensive copyright protections in order to give those who infringe on the rights of end users a taste of their own medicine. ...Unless I misunderstood you.
|
Use my Trade Hill referral code: TH-R11519 Check out bitcoinity.org and Ripple. Shameless display of my bitcoin address: 1Hio4bqPUZnhr2SWi4WgsnVU1ph3EkusvH
|
|
|
caveden
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
|
|
January 19, 2011, 08:24:06 PM |
|
GPL-advocates believe that simply by releasing with this license you'd prevent proprietary-software-scams?? Seriously? Do you really think that somebody willing to steal people's money will even bother to know what's the software license?
|
|
|
|
mikegogulski
|
|
January 20, 2011, 01:37:08 PM |
|
david@bankbox:~$ bitcoin validateaddress 1F417eczAAbh41V4oLGNf3DqXLY72hsM7 { "isvalid" : false }
Interesting -- the checksum for that address is wrong. Maybe a bug in Bitcoin? The actual address seems to be: 1F417eczAAbh41V4oLGNf3DqXLYBmgs6s I'm not sending funds to an address with a wrong checksum SMF bug. The "number of characters left" display on the signature input box appears to be wrong. Someone else had pointed out to me that my address there was invalid, and thought I corrected it by adding a "3" to the end: 1F417eczAAbh41V4oLGNf3DqXLY72hsM73 Should be working now, since I shorted the text in other places.
|
|
|
|
ElectricGoat
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
|
January 20, 2011, 01:47:43 PM |
|
GPL-advocates believe that simply by releasing with this license you'd prevent proprietary-software-scams?? Seriously? Do you really think that somebody willing to steal people's money will even bother to know what's the software license?
By releasing under a copyleft licence, you don't prevent abuses, but you make sure that they're illegal.
|
|
|
|
davout
Legendary
Online
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1008
1davout
|
|
January 20, 2011, 02:07:32 PM |
|
SMF bug. The "number of characters left" display on the signature input box appears to be wrong. Someone else had pointed out to me that my address there was invalid, and thought I corrected it by adding a "3" to the end:
1F417eczAAbh41V4oLGNf3DqXLY72hsM73
Should be working now, since I shorted the text in other places.
Promised BTC sent
|
|
|
|
mikegogulski
|
|
January 20, 2011, 04:09:42 PM |
|
Promised BTC sent
Ďakujem!
|
|
|
|
dkaparis
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 53
Merit: 0
|
|
January 20, 2011, 07:47:56 PM |
|
By releasing under a copyleft licence, you don't prevent abuses, but you make sure that they're illegal.
Nothing of the sort, since one can legally implement an abusive client from scratch.
|
|
|
|
0x6763
Guest
|
|
January 21, 2011, 01:43:56 AM |
|
If anything, GPL slows adoption compared to less restrictive licenses, such as MIT, BSD, or no license/copyright (Public Domain). People naturally try to make the best (in their own eyes) use of their resources, generally trying to increase their wealth (subjective). A business that wants to release their own client loses much of their competitive edge if they have to release the source code (and therefore their improvements) to their competitors. So why would they put the resources into something that won't give them a competitive edge when they have other, more profitable things they can do with their resources? However, an MIT license allows them to make changes and not release the source to their competitors, which may actually give them an edge over their competition, potentially leading to higher profits. If you don't have businesses promoting Bitcoin with their software releases, Bitcoin-related services, marketing budgets, etc., what chance does Bitcoin have to become mainstream? What use is Bitcoin to the mainstream if mainstream businesses don't use it? Most real life transactions are either consumers to business, or business to business. Why make Bitcoin less likely to become mainstream by using the GPL license?
My Bitcoin implementation will certainly not be GPL, and will be released in the Public Domain (assuming I don't unwittingly run into problems with any potential future co-developers demanding a license, asserting fallacious claims of control over the real property of myself and others), as I don't believe in initiating (or threatening the initiation of) violence to increase wealth (everything every human does is in attempt to increase their personal wealth in their own eyes), which means I don't believe in government or copyright, as the foundation of government is based on the (threat of) initiation of violence, and all of your open-source licenses are based on copyright laws that require the government. Until someone accomplishes the impossible and provides a proof that people should initiate violence to get what they want, any beliefs in support of government, copyright, and licenses based on copyright are unfounded, and are nothing more than religion and an attempt to force their religion onto others.
|
|
|
|
genjix
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1232
Merit: 1076
|
|
January 21, 2011, 02:28:06 AM |
|
MIT/BSD = Freedom GPL = Communism
I can do this too: Bicycles = Freedom Cars = Communism Freestyle = Freedom Backstroke = Communism Brunettes = Freedom Blondes = Communism
|
|
|
|
neptop
|
|
January 22, 2011, 06:43:35 PM |
|
Asterisk has GNU General Public License Avidemux has GNU General Public License Blender has GNU General Public License v2 or later Cinelerra has GNU General Public License ffmpeg has GNU LGPL 2.1+, GNU GPL 2+ Gimp has GNU General Public License GNU Compiler Collection has GNU General Public License (version 3 or later) LiVES has GNU General Public License version 3 or higher. MPlayer has GNU General Public License OpenOffice has GNU Lesser General Public License v3 OpenVPN has GNU GPL OpenX has GNU General Public License VirtualDub has GNU General Public License VLC has GNU General Public License v2 or later xine has GNU GPL
Want to join the Fun! BIND is ISC Compiz is MIT Enlightenment is BSD Fluxbox is MIT GHC and Hugs BSD Haiku is MIT lighttpd is BSD LLVM and clang are BSD Lua is MIT ncurses is BSD nginx is BSD OpenSSH is BSD PuTTY is MIT Tcl is BSD thttpd is BSD Tor is BSD vi is BSD Webkit is BSD X11 and most related projects are MIT Most implementations of Smalltalk are BSD or MIT Most implementations of JavaScript, as well as jquery and YUI are BSD or MIT Bittorrent became successful, because they were MIT, libtorrent (base for a big number of clients) is BSD
|
BitCoin address: 1E25UJEbifEejpYh117APmjYSXdLiJUCAZ
|
|
|
|