[NoInputSignal]

IMHO, I think this counters a philosophical point of open source software.

The open code to the software we use should not be a handout or a gift ex post facto.

The open code to the software should be an invitation: to collaborate on it, audit it, or frankly do anything you want with it (e.g. WTFPL); before, during, and after using it.

[_jal]

There are times to hold fast to ideals, and times when demanding purity is self-destructive. (And of course wisdom is knowing the difference, and much harder than it looks.)

Open source should be a big tent - it should be an answer to questions people have many different motives for asking. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

[thejynxed]

The old cathedral vs bazaar argument never goes away ;)

[Ericson2314]

That's like saying "landlords shouldn't be incentivized to hand over apartment over to residents after x years, because all housing should be publicly held"

You're not wrong, but given the world we live in the incentive would be better. And I would say that's the sort of "non-reformist reform" that's liable to push towards the ideal, not appease and reinforce the status quo.

[thaumasiotes]

> That's like saying "landlords shouldn't be incentivized to hand over apartment over to residents after x years, because all housing should be publicly held"

> You're not wrong

"Not wrong" seems like a... generous... description of this viewpoint. Lots of places tried the system of "all housing is publicly held"; it was not a success.

[rrdharan]

Ironically of course WTFPL is in fact not "do anything you want with it" despite the claims of the author and fans of the license.

https://opensource.google/docs/thirdparty/licenses/#wtfpl-no...

https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/29718/is-the-wtfpl-g...

[MaxBarraclough]

I'd never read that Google page before. I can't make sense of the section there named The ‘restricted’ licenses. It says:

> Third-party software made available under one of these licenses must not be part of Google products that are delivered to outside customers.

This policy covers all 3 versions of the GPL. And yet they made Android, based on the Linux kernel.

[mokus]

It’s really quite infuriating to me that I can’t just say “yeah I made this, but anyone can have it.”

I mean, really. It just seems batshit insane to me that this is problematic.

[alexhutcheson]

https://opensource.org/licenses/0BSD