- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmit.online
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmit.online
Privacy advocate challenges YouTube’s ad blocking detection::Irish eyes may not be smiling
Privacy advocate challenges YouTube’s ad blocking detection::Irish eyes may not be smiling
Louis Rossmann can go to fuck himself and his source available app that he keeps calling open source.
Newpipe existed long before Grayjay and will probably be there when grayjay dies since Newpipe’s license allows community forks. If the Newpipe team ceases development, others will take their place. If Rossmann ceases development, his app is left for dead
If only newpipe didn’t suck so hard though.
Users telling developers to fuck themselves is a irony lost in these threads. How many open source projects do you maintain?
Unless I am reading thus wrong, I do believe you are wrong here
FUTO TEMPORARY LICENSE
license grants you the rights, and only the rights, set out below in respect of the source code provided. If you take advantage of these rights, you accept this license. If you do not accept the license, do not access the code. Words used in the Terms of Service have the same meaning in this license. Where there is any inconsistency between this license and those Terms of Service, these terms prevail.
Section 1: Definitions
Section 2: Grant of Rights
Section 3: Limitations
Section 4: Termination, suspension and variation
Section 5: General
I hope this license is temporary because this license is non-free.
https://grayjay.app/faq.html
note how this explicitly leaves out modification.
once again, they exclude modification of the code.
no forks can be made because they aren’t allowed to modify the app in anyway.
Additionally, the termination clauses say that they can just terminate your rights to use the code if they feel like it, no other reason needed. This is a direct attack against open source.
l think they want grayjay to be a starting point as you can use the code still.
This is still far better than any proprietary software. At least this can be audited
Source available is open source by definition. Get mad at other things, but that is absolutely a fair description
by definition?
the Free Software Foundation, the ones that started the whole idea of sharing code as a philosophy of software, do not consider source available as free software or “open source”.
It does not meet Eric S Raymond’s definition, the one who invented the term “open source”.
It does not meet the Open Source Initiative definition either.
Even Wikipedia gives the right definition of open source:
So stop defending Rossmann and admit that the app is not open source.