Yes and no, if you have large-scale projects that require a ton of people, donations can be necessary.

Just because you take donations doesn’t mean you have a profit motive.

Also processing time, especially on weaker hardware or with bigger files.

On one hand I don’t trust random cracks not to have miners in them.

On the other I wouldn’t run a proprietary video game outside of a sandboxed VM any who.

being asked to give it up in the first place. Kik explained to him that they have to fight this or lose their tradmark because thats how trademark law works.

I’m not a lawyer but from what I know that’s a load of shit. There’s nothing stopping a trademark holder from granting licensing rights to third parties, without charge, to use their trademark in specific ways.

They chose not to because its easier, and most people won’t know better, so they roll over.

His response was basically “haha fuck you”. He probably could’ve asked for a couple thousand and just changed the name of his project and everything would’ve been fine.

This is the correct response, even if Kik would’ve given him money. It’s his package, he got the name first. Corpos can eat shit, just because its not the easy choice, or the choice you would’ve made doesn’t mean it was wrong. That package should’ve stayed down on principal.

Azer did nothing wrong.

Laurie Voss made a bad call and should feel bad.

The principals of free software was, is, and always will be more important than every single dollar in silicon valley combined.

She said slut referring to herself, and within the context of being a slut for something that isn’t inherently sexual.

Edit: Nope misread that. Either way there are a lot more contexts where one can use slut and not be shitty.

Well one of those is ableist while the other ones are just fun.

Yeah that’s why I threw “especially those in industry”.

Either way if you’re not writing software then yeah sorry your input matters less on the language we use to describe it.

I’m not gonna walk over to a doctors office and start arguing that the language they use is wrong because it doesn’t line up with what I know as a layperson.

Whether or not its “invalid” isn’t the point. Those are the accepted terms by most people, especially those in the industry. The point of language is to communicate ideas.

When most people say “free software”, they’re talking about software that’s free as in freedom. Using it otherwise just causes unnecessary confusion.

You’d maybe have a point if this was made up today, or even 10 years ago, but this was settled during the early years of the industry. Free software is free as in freedom, freeware is gratis but not free.

This is established industry jargon, and has been for over two fucking decades. Not really sure why its being argued.

You’re right, the first amendment wasn’t about freedom of expression, it was about not having to pay for books.

Using the word free to describe something that doesn’t restrict you has been a thing for centuries. “Free Software” has been the accepted term within the software world to denote freedom respecting, libre, and open source software since the 80’s.

This isn’t about because Richard Stallman said so. Its because its the definition pretty much everyone, especially those who’ve actually touched a compiler, uses.

If its personal or internal only copyright wont’t matter since no one will have it to release it.

Just don’t give it out.

Yeah lotta homegrown bedroom hackers will outdo any churned out bootcamp programmers, and absolutely compete with college graduates. Though for everyone of those there’s 100 claiming to be one.

No ones will to pay for good programmers and if they are they’re not willing to give them the resources or time.