Why is it a zero sum game instead of raising taxes on the rich?

That still doesn’t answer why do it then.

They’re literally attaching conditions to money. That’s one of the fundamentals of buying influence is attaching strings.

Do you think this is an isolated instance? They’re probably trying to do this a lot.

And if course they’re trying to influence other orgs to their will. Why else would you do this?

That assumes you have that kind of cash to pay them back when they come knocking…

They’re buying influence. Its pretty clear.

Sure, if your physically able to do it all that is.

Things like these are important to disabled folks.

Because libertarians are the first to remove legal protections in the name of small government. This isnt a blanket rule, more anecdotal than anything. But the ones I’ve managed to find and interact with all want to remove all sorts of legal protections.

The party doesn’t seem to represent those that I’ve interacted with. I get what your saying, but that just doesn’t match with who I’ve interacted with.

Okay so here’s where I interject more opnion than above.

libritarians miss the forest for the trees. From your opinion above you say fiscal responsibility. But you deney the help that social programs provide, and actually benift the economy. Poor people spend stimuls checks locally more than higher income brackets for example. Government serves people, not commerce.

And it’s important to know, if that’s your attitude, your gonna get laughed out of every open source circle.

Why the fuck would I when your this hostile?

Also since you complained no one looked at your code, you have support for plain text passwords in your code. That’s a huge no no.

Hokay. So docker does run as root. Podman can run rootless, but docker does run as root.

So if you have any vulnerabilities in your code, like say remote code execution, than your app already has access to root.

Also, don’t pretend like your shit don’t stink. My code has bugs. And I’ve been at this a a decade. Your vibe coded thing isnt going to be secure because you probably don’t even know how to make it secure if you don’t know docker runs as root.

Here’s where I interject my opnion

Its fine to do this for yourself. If you wanted to hear how great your AI produced slop go to LinkedIn.

When you share things to be used by others, you have a responsibility yourself. How will you monitor and package up security updates? What kind of depenecinies do you have? Are they up to date? Do they have any CVEs?

There’s so much more to publishing than good intentions. Its fine to do something like this for yourself. But to publish and then absolve yourself of any responsibility is not a way to get taken seriously.

You say the open source line, and then apply it to a project that doesn’t value those values.

Free as in freedom comes without restrictions like commercial use.

If that low bar of source avaialble (last I checked you have to request the source). That’s fine.

But for a lot of FOSS people its not because it means you can never learn from the code, and apply it in your paying job. Or in your own project that suddenly gets big. Then suddenly someone is knocking demanding money.

Its about the community as much about the code.

Yes, however those aren’t “copy left” licenses like AGPL whose defining feature is the owner not holding copyright

Do you think it’s genetic? Like we will still learn about Nazis, and so long as we do there will be people who agree with it.

Once you go copy left, you need everyone’s consent to change the license.

The MIT license is the creator owns the copyright, and any changes you contribute are licesned under the sam MIT as the project.

So to go from MIt -> anything only requires the consent of the project onwer.

Any copy left (like AGPL) license -> anything requires every contributors consent.

It is possible, but practically infeasible at scale.

I’d have to read more about AGPL, but IIRC GPLv2 says you must license any derived code as the same license.

IANAL, just someone whose looked into this before.

Citation needed for the lawsuit. “Exploring” doesn’t count.

You don’t think Ticketmaster, who has the ticket never leave their ecosystem, can’t enforce this well enough?

Like off market sales are gonna happen noatter what you do. But we could at least curtail platform sales …

Between that and limiting the number of tickets you can buy would knee cap scalpers IMO.

Like sure, I’m not saying a better system doesn’t exist.

I’m saying just going “print the name on the ticket” isn’t the easy grab.

I didn’t see a problem with the law limiting resale tickets to 150% of the face value. That seemed fine, but Ford repealed that law…

Copyright.

AGPL says that the original author of any chunk of code owns the copyright to it.

Meaning to change the license you have to get every copyright holder (read every developer who has contributed code) to agree to the license change and give over the copy right.

Edit: to be clear, I don’t like FUTO either. As a visible minority, I know libertarians are not my friends. But a copyright rug pull is hard to do in immich.

You missed the point of nit being able to say “hey I can’t go to the concert, I’ll give my ticket to someone else”

Sure, but still means your banning you ever giving your ticket to someone else is what I’m getting at.

Like if you can’t go, you just have to eat the cost of the ticket.