>developer abandons project >doesn't open source it

Why do freetards feel entitled to other people's source code?
Fuck off and write your own free implementation if you want it SO BAD.

>>60629223

It's his right. Should you be required to give up things built in your spare time just b/c someone like it?

>>60629264
>>60629298
>Open source automatically means GPL

I hope the developer posts a video where he is deleting the source code.

>>60629264
It's there to protect the effort of programmer. Let's say you develop a project for years. Suddenly you realize you don't want to support it anymore. Another Anon spends his years to develop better thing than you did and all those effort and time you spend vanishes, like you didn't do anything.
But it's his code anyway, if he just wants to throw away years of development, he can.

>>60629318
open source is worse than closed source
>here's my source code!
>you're not allowed to touch it though
>also if you look at it, I now have a solid case to sue you with if you ever compete with me in the future
Open sourced proprietary codebases are toxic.

Open source wasn't even a term of art until large companies got involved and formed "open source coalitions" to water down the meaning of 'free software" and distance themselves from the inconvenience of permissive software licenses.

>>60629223
thats why most people here love FOSS software and use FOSS software wherever it's possible.

>>60629223
oh fack, is that suns intent to burn my shit or why is it looking so grim?

>>60629428
They are lazy and cannot CREATE CODE,only EDIT CODE.So they steal other peoples projects.That is he only thing gpl is good for
lazy people

I can't see any rational reason NOT to open-source a dead project that the developer does not intend to ever revive. They're no longer gaining anything from keeping the source closed, so there's basically zero "cost" to open-sourcing it. It basically means they want the code to be lost forever. Sure, they have a "right" to do it, but I'm just not seeing any kind of upside. If you're actually proud of the software you've written, but no longer are interested in maintaining it, then releasing it to the community allows it to continue to exist and grow. And even if you literally believe the code is perfect and has no room for improvement, availability of the source code is a prerequisite for porting it to new systems.

Furthermore, not only open-sourcing but also releasing abandoned software under a free software license, gives users greater faith that your newer products actually are a better alternative. If there are still restrictions on the distribution of outdated software, it implies that the availability of that software is considered a threat to the sales of newer software. Which isn't really saying great things about that newer software.

>>60629223
yeah, wheres the windows xp and vista source?
ok, we've already seen half of it, but where's the rest ? microsoft should really open source it

>>60629264
>Why do freetards feel entitled to other people's source code?
Have you ever heard of the words "public good", "democracy" and "public interest?"

File: anigif_enhanced-buzz-25859-1407519091-14.gif (489KB, 350x197px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 350x197px

>>60629298
>his

>>60629333
>he

>>60629384
>he

>>60629467
Whatever happened to "don't reinvent the wheel"? It's much better to build on existing software, rather than to start from scratch. People are still creating new code you know, even in the open-source community. But they only create new projects when they need software that does not already exist; they do not reimplement existing software just because.

>>60629577
most people here are american, so theres a good chance he didn't

>>60629577
>forcibly give up the copyrights to your own creation because fuck you! sharing is caring!!

and this is why nobody takes you seriously

>>60629223
I remember the PSX emulator which was abandoned. It was pretty good back then. Now i use retroarch + beetle.

>>60629592
gnome
kde
Your logic broken in 3 lines

>>60629585
>implying women can into programming

>>60629551
I'd be a lot more confident in newer versions of Windows if they made Windows XP and earlier free software. They keep SAYING that Windows 7 and 10 are so much better and more secure, yet it can't be that much greater if they think Windows XP and 95 being available is cutting into their sales.

File: ididntevengooglethis.jpg (8KB, 288x216px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 288x216px

>>60629585
>picture from buzzfeed
>"his, he, he"

kill yourself my man

>>60629605
you mean "bleem" or whatever it was called ?
that one was fucking awesome, ps1 games ran faster on a fucking 500mhz intel celeron than today with pcsx-r on a core2quad or phenom2

>>60629619
there's actually a reason why they don't release the source.
if you read CVEs most of them affect windows 7-10, and a few years ago most of them affected xp-8 .. they just stop mentioning versions that aren't supported anymore.
so i'm pretty sure the still use a shitton of old broken code

>>60629607
how?

>>60629657
One existed before the other.Then they created the other,and all the tools were duplicated to do the same needs.There are competing programs that do the same damn thing.Not even counting other DE/WM's.

>>60629607
Was one created because the other was under a restrictive license? If not, then no, it doesn't "break my logic". And if it was, then it's merely proving my point about how non-free licenses are cancer. It's not reinventing the wheel to create something that is different in some way, yet fulfills the same basic purpose. Take ReactOS for example. It is reinventing the wheel with regards to Windows, since Windows is under a non-free license. But it is not reinventing the wheel with regards to GNU/Linux, because although both are operating systems, they differ to such an extent that it's more practical to create a free Windows-compatible operating system from scratch, than to fork Linux and make it Windows-like. But even so, ReactOS does utilize existing free software code when possible, only using new code when there does not already exist code that fulfills the required needs.

>>60629614
If you're using Windows, macOS, Linux or BSD, iOS or Android, women worked on your operating system. You're running their code right now.

>>60629599
>Forcibly
OP isn't saying they should be forced to open source abandonware, he's saying they're cunts for not doing it. You're free to be a cunt.

>>60629705
Working on as in ensuring cultural diversity

>>60629705
Are there any operating systems in use today that haven't been worked on by women?

File: xwindows-8-blue-screen-error.png.pagespeed.gp_jp_jw_pj_ws_js_rj_rp_rw_ri_cp_md.ic.yOWUS_rYGn.png (38KB, 650x373px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 650x373px

>>60629705
Yeah, and it shows. Is it a surprise Windows 10 is losing marketshare to Windows 7?

>>60629739
Nice buzzwords, friendo.

>>60629789
What are you implying?

>>60629765
Women didn't only start working on Windows with Windows 10, you know. And Windows 10's problem is basically that it's a forced meme. It's just a giant NSA backdoor. They never intended it to be good or usable, otherwise they wouldn't have pushed it so hard.

>>60629599
world is full of ~2000 era PC with old abandonware that only works on windows 98 for some reason, but is required to use some piece of technology that still works and will work for 20+ years probably, thanks to people who think their copyright matters when they gain no more profit out of it.

>>60629577
Fuck off, commie. A pure democracy has never worked anyway because it's glorified mob rule.

>>60629893
Exactly, democracy is shit, Communism strong. We need one single leader with V I S I O N.

>>60629857
what the fuck are you even on about?

>>60629893
I'd rather have mob rule than be ruled by the elites who see me as a resource that can be expended for their own advancement. Besides, there's nothing wrong with ``Communism", it just means people having control over their own lives.

>>60629585
This. Why does /g/ is so fulled with bigots?

>>60629936
Copyright prevents abandoned software (that is still in use, because nobody has yet come up with an adequate replacement) from being ported to new systems. IMO it could be solved by requiring a copyright holder to make a certain amounts of sales each year or lose the copyright.

>>60629944
>people having control over their own lives
No,you will still have someone over you that owns your life in return for resources.
Look at africa.They are so communist that new bussinesses are shutdown because they community says "oh you have alot of X,we need X,you give me X for free because you have so many X"

>>60629967
Thats a bullshit retarded idea.
Why dont you personally program a new updated version that works on the hardware as a replacement? Then give it away free to the industry also while providing support for free?

Communism
>Everything is free, we own you and we'll fucking kill you if you have more than anyone else
Free Software
>Public interests must be disclosed or else this harms the spirit of democracy

Argument invalid, try again
>>60629893

>>60629970
>africa is communist
wew lad

>>60629990
Because that would be reinventing the wheel. I'd much rather spend the time focusing on the code that needs to be modified to make it portable, rather than having to rewrite the core of the program from scratch. It's inefficient, that's my main complaint. And it requires much more skill to rewrite a program than to just port it and rebuild it.

>>60630007
>>Everything is free, we own you and we'll fucking kill you if you have more than anyone else
You're describing slavery, not Communism.

>>60630007
>my imaginary system is better than communism because I get to decide who shares what, not like communism where someone else gets to decide. After all, I'm better than those people!

File: 1487558007117.gif (402KB, 250x189px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 250x189px

>>60630045
>inefficent
>port
So you're lazy and cant code.
These are the people that inhabit neo /g/ and are the loudest.
Fat lazy do nothings who hide behind gpl cause they are incompetent and can only edit basic code and cannot CREATE code
GOOD talk

>>60630077
Let's see you write a ``Hello World" program without using any libraries. And then explain why doing so is valuable, other than ``muh real programmer bragging rights".

>>60629705

Great, now I have cooties. Thanks.

>>60629223

>freetard makes software
>abandons it

>it dies

literally 99% of freetard projects are dead

>developer abandons project
>the open source is freely available!
>too stupid to figure out which one of the 50+ source files I need to find and edit to get it working again.

It's an Android program that pipes TwitchTV streams to your media player and the quality options are hard coded to only be set to "low, medium, high, and source," but now Twitch has changed it to 360p, 480p, 720p, so forth.. so you can't choose quality settings in this app anymore.

I know for a fact that fixing this program would be just as easy as setting up 360p, 480p, and 720p in place of the low, medium, and high settings, but I don't know how to sift through all of these fucking files!

>>60630141
Yet there's a chance of reviving it. Not so with dead closed-source projects.

>>60629990
because the hardware and software is often locked and the producent (in other words the cunt) did not provide any documentation, and you cannot rewrite the software legally through reverse engineering.
I really understand that companies do not release the source for old versions of programs that they keep updated (autocad, corel, office, photoshop) but holy shit if you go out of business or do not plan to gain any profit ever why do you need to hold the copyright?

>>60630141
If it dies it means it's no longer useful to ANYONE, it's outlasted it's usefulness.

truly good and USEFUL code (note the USEFUL, that's important) outlasts the platform it was written on.

>>60629417
That's not what open source means.
https://opensource.org/osd-annotated

>>60630168
""""chance"""""

nope

also freetards don't use closed source software so why they care?

>>60630115
It's simple
I dont claim to be a programmer.

There is nothing wrong with copyrights.
There is nothing wrong with patents.
There is nothing wrong with proprietary software

Only freetards think so and cant be bothered to CREATE.

I'm not a freetard

Whipping people you control, forcing them into labor, or else, and dictating what each slave receives != Equal social hierarchy, including free ownership of an item under equal rule

Argument invalid, try again
>>60630059

>>60629585
This isn't Tumblr

>>60630068
>I get to decide who shares what
ahem
>I get to decide what business and rights holders share what as long as someone ASKS
Stop twisting words to make them sound evil

>>60630228
what about the windows network stack that M$ copied from BSD ? windows is a proprietary closed source OS build with parts from free open source software
how does that fit into your twisted world ?

>>60630288
>as long as someone ASKS
so, all the time?

>>60630228
I believe that a free anarchy-capitalist world would do a good job of self-regulating copyrights and patents, but man, protecting your ideas seems like it would be full-time job.

Let's say you made a movie, a song, or whatever, people could just edit your name out of the opening credits, say "I MADE THIS MOVIE" and sell it and garner a following that they do not deserve.

I want to believe that people would be wise enough to realize it was a facade and that "you" are the original creator and you'd get your rightful praise for the work you've exerted, but having to deal with that as a new up and comer would be the worst shit ever.

>>60630341
>implying that someone is even interested in the source code of a 500 line database program from a business in the middle of nowhere, Alaska

>>60630300
not him but with BSD lincense it always looks like someone (usually the author) was not smart enough to think of a way to profit from the code they produced, so they get fucked in the ass by some big corporations. Also it seems that they were not smart enough to use a better license at the same time

Does non software like music or art need to be under a libre license to be libre?

>>60630372
maybe you're right, your government would only steal good code

>>60630376
It means they just want to write code and not worry about communist ideologues trying to control the way they distribute code and they certainly don't want to participate in licensing wars or licensing politics, they're just happy the code is used at all.

Incidentally, all the most useful libraries and software is BSD or similarly permissive licensed.

GPL guarantees that no company will touch it with a 1000 foot pole and it's only users will be other freetards for their hobbyist projects.
LPGL, AGPL, these are verboten too because they sound identical and their actual license terms require a fucking lawyer to understand.

>>60629264

Maybe he doesn't feel entitled to someone's work but is just sad that development is guaranteed to stop forever.

>>60630435
MIT license is far more popular than BSD.

>>60630376
thats not really true, it's common to use e.g. BSD license if software gets developed by universities where people get paid for it. i don't care that others copy my code, because 1. i already got paid to write it, and 2. i think releasing code under a free license is the right thing to do.
and it's always amusing to find out about "bigger" companies actually using your code e.g. when they submit patches

>>60630341
>>60630372
Uh oh.

Someone is logically reasoning. This must be terrorism, because they have an actual sense of thought.

>>60629264
When it comes to mathematical type stuff like programming, there is always an autistic person who can optimize your code and make it better.

Go on any programming forum or chatroom with a pastebin of your function and they will always go out of their way to streamline it and rub it in your face to show how good they are at programming.

I don't understand how these people exist, but they are out there. Brilliant people who spend 12+ hours a day in social programming places to give advice and show off.

Let these people make software the best it can possibly be by open-sourcing your work

>>60629264

S
C
ARTIFICIAL
R
C
I
T
Y

>>60630365
People do that now.Thats why you mark it in a way that others cannot remove.
WATERMARK

>>60630224
>nope
Based on what exactly? If the source is available, I can compile and modify it.

>also freetards don't use closed source software so why they care?
Not everyone who uses free software is an absolute freetard.

>>60630228
>I dont claim to be a programmer.
So then you also don't claim to have the experience to know that this emphasis on "creating" is nonsensical. There's no fundamental difference between adding an extension to an existing program, and writing a new program from scratch. Both involve the same amount of creative and intellectual effort. If you actually look at things, you'll note that a lot of software in use today is not created from scratch, but developed from stuff decades old. Even Nano, one of the younger of the Unix editors, is 17 years old. Bash is 27 years old. The NT kernel is 23 years old. If we were constantly "creating" new code for everyday tasks, we'd be dealing with orders of magnitudes more bugs and compatibility issues. It ONLY makes sense to "CREATE" new code from scratch when there doesn't already exist code that meets your needs.

>>60630234
>describe slavery
>call it communism
>use it as proof that communism is the same as slavery
not an argument

>>60630365
Also, the whole premise of capitalism is that people fundamentally want to increase their wealth. Capitalism doesn't assume people are moral, it assumes they are greedy, and is designed to achieve the optimal outcome resulting from people's greed. So really, in an ancap society, protection of IP rights would tend to come down to who offers a better deal. If Alice makes a movie, and Bob claims it as his own, and sells it for a lower price than Alice, people aren't likely to call Bob out for stealing, even if they're aware he is, because doing so would make them have to pay more.

File: 220px-Quentin_Tarantino_(Berlin_Film_Festival_2009)_2_cropped[1].jpg (15KB, 220x253px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 220x253px

>>60630623
>If Alice makes a movie, and Bob claims it as his own, and sells it for a lower price than Alice, people aren't likely to call Bob out for stealing, even if they're aware he is, because doing so would make them have to pay more.

True, but if you really like Alice's movie. Let's say Alice is actually Quentin Tarantino and assuming that you enjoy his movies, I want to believe that you want to make sure t hat Tarantino gets paid for his work and not that scumbag Bob faggot who just stole it and started pressing out his own discs.

>>60630699
True, but that's assuming people think about the long term. Some people will, I'm sure, but I suspect the masses care more about immediate gratification. Look at how common digital piracy is today.

>>60630623
lol baited

>>60630623
>>use it as proof that communism is the same as slavery
>not seeing the ! in the '='
also, name one moment where whipping was allowed in a Communist society, ever

>>60629488
B-b-but then people could make money from my work and that's communism. It's better to let work go to waste than to support communism.

>>60630803
>It's better to let work go to waste than to support communism.
true

>>60630729
>>60630699
>>60630623

movies are a horrible example because pretty much every movie nowadays just rips of another movies are is a remake/reboot of something

>>60630803
If others making money off your work is what bothers you, you could always release it under a license that forbids commercial distribution.

CommuSlave So cial am IS m s I free Dom Demo Social aism LI bre ral a SO ci MA coc LI slm SIcoiaol ism So SOcialism Is thE equal Social Coproration Social Freedom Kill RMS Kill RMS Kill RMS Kill RMSocialsim Democracommunis SAnimal faSocialk Stalin CommuNist DemoSocia Commu Regulate CorporKill RMS Kill RMS Kill RMS Kill RMS Kill Social CommuniSlavery Is Democratic SlaverCommunism Slavery Tyranny Socialism Stalin Copying Sharing Freedom Democracy Kill RMSKill RMSKill RMS Kill RMS Kill RMSKill RMSKill RMS Socialism Kill RMS SocDemocra

4 ERROR.

>>60630880

but then that wouldn't make it "free software"

>>60629705
You can put a wig on a Indian and call it a woman but it's still a street shitter.

>>60630924
That's kind of debatable. The FSF definition doesn't explicitly say that the four freedoms require the right to distribute commercially, merely that it's permitted by the GPL. Maybe it wouldn't be 100% free software, but most of the benefits would still be there.

>>60630925
Keep moving those goalposts.

>>60630880
enforcing GPL is hard enough to enforce and it's one of the more commonly known licenses, and still a lot of companies violate it.
how would a license that forbids commercial distribution even work ? i'm pretty sure most companies would just claim that you pay for the other parts of the software or whatever they distribute

>>60630880
>I want people to buy my product
>but I should also release it for free through my licence. It's ok though, while I'm losing out on money at least no one else will sell it either

>>60631022
You can get money if we all work together to tax the rich.[/left]

>>60631088
no thanks I'd rather earn my money, not make the government take it disproportionately from others and give it to me. The latter notions seems a bit insulting to both sides

>>60629223
Why don't people try to reverse engineer?

>>60631111
>bit insulting to both sides
The left and the poor left have been fighting to tax the rich and eliminate big corporations since 1980, anon.

>>60631112
m$ already sued people because they _thought_ they reverse engineered some of their shit, even though it wasn't true. stalled some projects for years

>>60629223
>developer gets C&D
>actually C&Ds project

>>60631022
No, we're talking about a case where the original developer is no longer interested in commercial distribution, yet does not want anyone else to make money from it.

>>60631112
They do, but it's still technically illegal, and it's a lot more difficult than modifying the source.

>>60630388
No. In order for art to be libre all it needs to do is give you the freedom to share or resell it, the freedom to watch it as much as you want, whenever you want; and the freedom to make copies for archival or educational purposes.

Since media is not a tool like software is, but rather a means to convey the author's feelings and thoughts; the freedom to modify it to suit your needs is not necessary. Basically, all needed to have "libre" media is not to include DRM. The fact that they're paid and/or have copyright doesn't make them less libre since the FSF and Stallman is not against copyright or paid.

CDs and books respect your freedoms, for instance, so they're libre. iTunes music and Amazon ebooks don't, so they're not libre.

>>60631226
things change. You're not interested now and maybe there's no demand, but in 5 years who knows. But if you release it the opportunity is dead forever. You as a third party don't get to decide who needs what

>>60629223
So offer the programmer some money or a blowjob. If you want the code bad enough don't be lazy Millennial scrub.

T.Genx

>>60631251
Sure but I'm talking about cases where the developer knows for sure they're never going to release it again. I mean, if the code was written by a single private programmer who died 15 years ago, who exactly is being harmed by me having access to the code and redistributing it?

>>60631335
if they know for sure they're not doing anything with it they'll release it without there being a law about it. But most people don't and can't know for sure

>>60631359
Nobody said that it should be required by law, just that developers are being dicks when they abandon a project without releasing it to the community.

>>60629488
>I can't see any rational reason NOT to open-source a dead project that the developer does not intend to ever revive.
Licensing and cleaning up the codebase takes more than 0 effort.
If you made software that is a spaghetti clusterfuck and isn't likely to be revived ever - eg like the recently open sourced Urban Chaos https://github.com/dizzy2003/MuckyFoot-UrbanChaos - it is wasted efforts.

>>60631231
If I wanted to sell music but put a non commercial requirement or I was the only one who could sell it, is it still proprietary.

Somewhat related rage-provoking story time!
>dolphin add-on gets abandoned
>good guy forks it
>original dev comes back and asks for ownership of the fork
>good guy gives it to her
>original dev adds no new code and abandons the project yet again
>angry guy calls her a bitch for taking ownership of the project just to abandon it
>"HOW DARE YOU. I HAD A CHILD. I DON'T HAVE TIME TO MAINTAIN THE PROJECT. BUT YOU WERE MEAN SO I CAME BACK TO BEG FOR SOMEONE ELSE TO TAKE IT OVER"
>add-on now is dead because plasma 5 broke compatibility with it

>>60632293
Media cannot be "proprietary" or "libre" in the same sense as an operating system would be because those definitions were created explicitly for software. For media to respect your freedom, all it needs to do is to contain no DRM or otherwise forbid you from playing it/sharing it/reselling it/creating backups of it.

The GPL, for instance, is problematic when used in stuff like fonts. If you use a GPL-licensed font in a book, then the book must be released under the GPL, too.

The GPL cannot, and should not, be used in stuff other than software.

>>60629599
>copyright
It seems >>60629597 is mostly right.

>>60629918
kek, communism was supposed to be the most democatic democacy.

>>60631226
>They do, but it's still technically illegal
How?

>>60629298
Of course not. People only ask for the source if your project was distributed in the first place.

>>60629990
>africa is communist
I'm not paid to read this

>>60630228
>There is nothing wrong with copyrights.
>There is nothing wrong with patents.
>There is nothing wrong with proprietary software

How can someone be so stupid as to believe this and still be able to operate a keyboard?

Say you're a farmer. You grow normal corn and the guy down the road grows GMO corn. Some pollen from the GMO corn gets blown in to your field and you save some seeds for next year. Next year Monsanto discovers you have some GMO genes in your corn and sues you using patents.

It's like if an musician burned a bunch of his CDs and threw them all over your yard then picked one up and found his music on them. Then he took you to court and won.

How the fuck do you think that's not something wrong with patents?

>>60629918
Communism is a worldwide anarchist system. There is no government under communism.

>>60629705
Sure thing buddyo.

>>60632569
lmao, should have kept it forked.

>>60633384
Until I make one.

>>60631111
Well, then I hope you have an extremely well paid team of accountants, because if you don't you are paying disproportionately

>>60633318
>you have some GMO genes in your corn and sues you using patents.
But God uses the GPL, Monsanto needs to be open source.

>>60629918
The politburo finds your statement offensive. Off to the gulag with you!

>>60633673
You can't even make a logo

>>60629585
kys

>>60633673
Jej

>>60629223
Make your own, assbandit

File: smb3.jpg (73KB, 606x449px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 606x449px

>>60629462
Do yourself a favor, install a Super Nintendo emulator, download a Super Mario Bros. All Stars ROM and play Super Mario Bros. 3, one of the great platformers of all time.

>>60629417
>itt: stupid nigger doesn't know what open source means, complains about open source anyway

>>60629488
You do know that id software had to do a ton of work to open source the doom engine back in the day. They had used third party sound libraries, and a few other small parts, and those COULDN'T be open sourced. They spent time and money to reimplement today parts, just so they could open source it. Some small time developer who abandons their project? You can't expect them to blow money and time they don't have to stroke your need for idiological purity.

>>60629585
>guaranteed replies
kys

>>60636989
>small time developer
>having access to other's proprietary code
Also, anybody would be just using API calls to a library, you can just remove library's files. It will have undefined references, but that's fixable by someone else

>>60629585
Hostess
Actress
Landlady
Doctorette