[johnnyanmac]

>MIT means you give up effective ownership and control. You lose control and contributions. And what do you get for that loss of control? Exposure. Or, in this and many other cases similar, you get diddly shit.

Isn't that what true freedom is?

You can argue that more freedom is a net burden for both the individual and society (tragedy of the commons), but that doesn't negate the aspect of it being more free to begin with.

>And not many of us are independently wealthy, and can do things that we want with no monetary care.

Indeed. But not many people contribute to any kind of OS community to begin with (regardless of the license). I would like to one day, but then the industry laid me and hundreds of thousands off in the last few years and those plans were delayed.

There definitely is a certain level of privilege in being able to provide knowledge to others on the side. Even morose if you're part of an organization that pays you to do so.

[immibis]

Maximum freedom is when people have the freedom to do everything except take away other people's freedom. When you give people the freedom to take away other people's freedom, you don't get a free society.