thevoidzero @ thevoidzero @lemmy.world

Posts

9

Comments

271

Joined

1 yr. ago

First of all, in many cases, writing new code is lot easier than trying to modify/salvage old code from someone else. Unless you can just plug it in for a modular function in that case your code is not useless.

And if they think your code is valuable enough to save that many people after they improve it, they can approach you for dual license or other agreements. They pay people with patent all the time, so they can do the same for people who's volunteering their time for open source.

Publishing it under GPL does benefit the humanity because any improvement on it will be also available to everyone. Letting corps take your work and put a monetary/legal block for people to use freely doesn't seem like benefiting humanity that much.

Please give me a couple millions.

Without open sourcing it, it would probably been hard to market it and keep improving it though. Like if Linux was not open source project it probably would have had the same fate so many other OS before it had.

That's what bibliography is. It's already like that, or am I missing something?

We're not saying pay the authors a bunch, we're saying make the papers free to read. Or at least don't charge authors and readers both, while keeping all the money for yourself.

Yeah. I'm just worried when extractor fails they put it in discard pile, or human pile which'll delay my application by a lot.

Ocular shows a warning ⚠️ this file requires new version of adobe acrobat DC, press ok to download latest version or see your system administrator.

Installing it is such a hassle, and booting is too, I used to just close while saving state, but that messes up the time in VM and it leads to problems.... Is there any light weight basic windows type VM you use? Or is it the generic iso?

I know it's adobe problem. Because they deprecated it in PDF 2.0, last support is in 1.7, but they have continued using 1.7 with adobe extension 1 to 1.7 with Adobe extension 8. So it's like they have their own branch of PDF versions. But most people don't care, and here a government agency is using that and it's not accessible for linux.

Wine needs 32bit libraries that's why I'm not using it. I read the snap package handles the wine part for us, so I tried that in VM but didn't work. I'll try to follow your suggestion in VM and see if it'll work.

Some parts already have filled text that are dynamic fields (but without the support it becomes fixed text). So I can't write over it. And Firefox doesn't recognize them as fields, otherwise I could delete the part. It's so frustrating.

Draw seems to disregard the form fields, so I could probably fill it in Firefox, and use draw to edit the auto calculated fields. It'll work for printed forms, but if any org uses pdf fields extractor wouldn't that be a problem?

Thank you.

From my interactions with the people that'll fund this. It does look like they want me to just develop this. But my advisor has not done this kind of software development grants. And the people I talked to might also not know what their organization's legal requirements are put in contract. That's why I want to know what kind of language I should use in proposal so that it can be used as a point of discussion if someone from their organization says we can't do that. Instead of them just assuming I'll hand over everything.

Yeah, but my program does not have such things in the code. And if you add it, GPL will make it so that they have to share to code, so people will be able to tell if they try it, right?

Thank you. I'm a PhD student, so I do not have access to Lawyers that I can ask, and it probably will cost me money to get their opinion if I seek professional lawyers.

If whatever changes/improvement they make is available for everyone to use, I consider that contributions to the open source.

I don't mind them making money off of it, as long as they contribute to the open source community by improving it, contributing upstream, or using it in other systems and keeping those open source as well. I want other people to benefit from the effort I made and published, and if someone wants to improve it, I want others to benefit from there too.

I don't want the case like insulin in US, where the first invention is free because they wanted everyone to benefit from it. But now it's super expensive because of the incremental advances other corps did that are patented. And the free version is no longer viable to use without those incremental improvements.

I'm fine as long as it is used in other GPL projects. I just don't want them to take this, use it on some proprietary code and make money/mine data and other things and not contribute to upstream or open source in general.

I hadn't thought about the network usages, I though GPL covered it. So, is AGPL everything GPL has plus software service from network? If yes, then I will use that license. EDIT: Saw that AGPLv3 is indeed GPLv3 + the network thing.

Further points:

I also have a lot of other libraries and programs that I have developed and published with GPLv3 license, so I also want to integrate them with the new program. Since I don't want to reinvent the wheel for things I have already done. And I'll probably want to integrate this software on things I might make in the future.

Yup, looks like that movie. Thanks, I didn't remember the name.