10

10 comments

[–] x0x7 4 points (+4|-0) Edited

I noticed his video isn't licensed under creative commons. What he's saying is that people whose work is majorly not open source can't possibly contribute something positive to it without producing some sort of corruption in what it's meant to be.. hmmm...

What I dislike most though isn't that Intel contributes to Linux but that these companies run open source operations to get free labor and to dominate parts of tech that give them control over other connected parts of the stack. For example Chrome. It's mostly developed via Chromium. Basically people doing free work for google so that google can dominate web standards that help their business model and can develop features on their websites (youtube) knowing ahead of time what the specifics of the standard will be. And then require other open source projects like firefox to develop their features list.

Bill Gates basically said that you're cucked if you are doing free work. Well you are major cucked if you are doing free work for a corporation. Anyone who works on Chromium is doing negative work towards a free and open web. If you want to contribute to a free and open web build something that breaks standards.

[–] E-werd [OP] 1 points (+1|-0)

What he's saying is that people whose work is majorly not open source can't possibly contribute something positive to it without producing some sort of corruption in what it's meant to be.. hmmm...

I would guess his major concern here is aimed at Microsoft in particular. Consider their (previous?) internal strategy of Embrace, extend, and extinguish. This seems to fit right into all of Microsoft's linux and general open source strategies. I think .NET Core is a long-term strategy to get wide adoption in the linux community and make it a major dependency, though it would have to be a super long-term strategy because the biggest players in FOSS have a strong distrust of Microsoft.

Even further you have Microsoft's acquisition of GitHub, which is the largest git site in the world and houses some of the most important open-source projects. They're attempting to create dependency.

If you want to contribute to a free and open web build something that breaks standards.

Ehh, I think the vast majority of folks agree that open standards should be adhered to. We remember what happened in the 90's with the "wild west" approach to standardization and it wasn't pretty. The internet as a whole has functionally improved through standards like CSS, HTML/5, Javascript modernization, and the removal of closed standards like Adobe Flashplayer and Microsoft Frontpage.

While what you said there is technically correct, there's a line between "can" and "should" that needs to be acknowledged.