pazukaza @ pazukaza @lemmy.ml

Posts

1

Comments

228

Joined

2 yr. ago

I said it doesn't matter if the Nazis were right wing or left wing, what matters is that they were criminals. Then that person said that mass murder and racism is only aligned with the right, so I showed him/her that that is wrong, murder and racism can also happen on the left.

The point being that just because in the past there were rotten apples in the left/right, it doesn't mean that being in the left/right makes you a rotten apple.

What? I'm just saying that being racist or a murderer is totally unrelated to political views. Those can happen in both the left and right.

Guys, you're smarter than this. For real.

So you're saying that racism and mass murder did not exist under communist China?

What about Russification in the Soviet Union? Minorities were marginalized.

Why would it be a problem if the Nazis were actually left-wing? You're not realizing you're actually a victim of a fallacy. And even more concerning, you're trying to use the same fallacy to attack back. It's just flawed logic all over the place.

Yeha, that's my point. They automatically put you in the far-right if you don't agree with a principle of communism.

The US is the largest global economy. How is it that free healthcare is a thing even in developing countries?

A few days ago my grandfather used an ambulance and the total cost was $0. I live in a developing country.

I see a fellow social democrat and I upvote.

People here think that if you agree with private property and private incentive then you suck billionaires d*cks.

Man, there is a whole spectrum that is much more realistic than pure communism or socialism.

Wait, do people really care if Nazis were left or right-wing?

Their leader was a racist mass murderer with superiority complex, who cares about his political views?

Let's say they were left-wing... Does that make the left wing Nazis? Mmm no. If a dictator is right-wing, does that make the right-wing dictators? No.

Do people understand these are two unrelated things? Imagine seeing a dog owner cheating on his wife and assuming all dog owners are cheaters.

I mean, fuck that place, but this particular instance of censorship seems acceptable and even good. Some schizo dude on the interweebs could think this is God speaking to him or something. Don't promote violence online.

This makes total sense. They should change that to "fuck Reddit".

OK, so is Redhat breaking any license? Do you really think a company like Redhat would open itself to thousands of lawsuits like that. The CEO already explained that this is totally legal and covered by GPL. They are in fact distributing the source to the people receiving the product. This is exactly what GPL says. They are not forced to open the source code to people who aren't getting the distributed software.

What is your complaint then? They are not breaking any law and they are following the GPL license.

I was using the webframework/language as examples because you said this wasn't a matter of law but a matter of principle. So why does the principle apply to Redhat but not the million other products that totally depend on FOSS on their core?

So many projects do in fact distribute the FOSS, but they use more permissive licenses like MIT, Apache or LGPL. BUT you're saying the law is not relevant, what matters is the principle. So why don't everyone release their code if they depend on FOSS on their core products? Because they aren't breaking the Apache or MIT licenses? Well, that's great! Redhar isn't breaking the GPL license either. Why must Redhat follow whatever subjective principles you have?

— "hey there's this company creating a commercial product around FOSS. They aren't breaking any license."

— "Nice, as long as the licenses aren't compromised"

— "It's Redhat"

— "Those mofos! How dare they!"

I think the problem goes like this:

1. they enslaved black people.
2. black people gained freedom. A lot of white people who were rich at their expense hated them for their freedom. They also saw them as inferior humans. This hate was passed through generations.
3. the CIA started a drug abuse pandemic in black communities intentionally.
4. black people were poor compared to white people. Being hated reduced their opportunities.
5. poverty and drug trafficking leads to higher crime rates.
6. a higher crime rate leads to more discrimination and less opportunities.
7. go back to step 4. It becomes a cycle.

So these people either hate them because their cultural heritage (which seems likely for Alabama) or because the black community has a higher rate of violence, which is also the fault of white people.

Well, the re-builders would be breaking the law now that the source code isn't available for non-paying customers. They weren't breaking the law before.

So, do you expect every company to release the source code of their products just because they used a FOSS web framework or a FOSS programming language like Python? Or by the same logic, for companies to release the source code of their products if their developers use Linux in their development machines? Or if they use Linux to deploy their applications in the cloud? That's such an unreasonable position.

So you never intended to buy the product but you intended to use it?

Do you understand they are charging you for the usage, not for your intentions or moral views?

Push bracelets on you? Who is forcing you to use their software? Please let me know, we can call the police man, that's fucked up.

1. they are not breaking any law. This is totally allowed. You can use FOSS to create a commercial product.
2. they are major contributors to the Linux space. And they'll keep contributing.
3. It's their effort, they created a business around it, and it cycles back to push Linux forward.
4. this isn't even going to affect average users. This is going to take money from companies that probably have the money to pay. For other companies, there are other distributions available.

The Danny DeVito one got me the first time.

That was a fucking depressing article. How can they be this evil?

I see you don't have hot cousins /s

You're taking away the profit they deserve for the work and effort it took them to create the information.

— "we don't like people ripping off our work without any added value"

— "Here, let me push this to your staging environment, totally breaking your quality process"

— "No"

— "Well, what the hell do you want broo?"

I don't think they have ever hidden the fact this is about money. I don't like the fact this is about money, but the fact that others were cloning and selling their efforts for a cheaper price is awful.