This is a follow-up to Jon’s original post on Carefully (but purposefully) oxidising Ubuntu and Julian’s migration spec for 25.10. We promised transparency throughout this process, and this post is written in that spirit. What happened after the announcement Following the decision to adopt rust-coreutils, we got to work. Any package shipped by default in Ubuntu must be promoted to Ubuntu Main, which requires passing a thorough security review. We quickly assembled an internal team spanning Ubun...
There are a lot less GPL projects in your system than you might think. Your core system is already filled with liberally licensed libraries and programs. Case in point, since you talked about rust rewrites, original sudo is not GPL software.
Oh no, a non gpl package on my computer? How did you find out about my one weakness! I’m melting, melting! Oh, what a world, what a cruel, cruel world!
If you’re posting from Desktop Linux, your comment utilized at least 10 liberally licensed libraries. And that’s before it got into the wire. GPL packages are a MINORITY, not a majority with exceptions.
Oh no, with so few gpl packages how will i maintain an unkempt beard and bald ponytail?! How will my ketchup stained Grateful Dead tee hold together at this critical low level of gpl? At this rate my bare feet will stop stinking up the break room!
Our new present and its future requires the defense of ideas for all.
And MIT is lacking because it doesn’t force commercial users to lie about what they do behind closed doors? Trust me, if they are so inclined, they already do plenty of that. Next, with LLM assistance, all your copyleft code is freely available for word-salad-surgery remix and rebrand with whatever license anybody wants - as it always has been, LLMs just cut the labor required to do so by a huge margin.
Yes. MIT is literally lacking that protection because it doesn’t force corporate users to lie or do their own work.
Should the fact that the powerful act with impunity when not challenged be an argument against challenging them? That’s a little facile…
Again, if you just want to feel good that the things I care about are going away, rest assured that llm output is going to remove the concept of copyleft in advance of a multipolar world where secrets and incompatibility are suddenly the order of the day.
Yes! I mean, don’t divert the hate of permissive license to Rust. Those are unrelated but now more people hate Rust because of this.
They’re not unrelated. Lauded projects to rewrite some gpled c thing in rust are almost universally mit licensed.
Attempts to get those licenses changed are almost universally met with a line in the sand.
There are a lot less GPL projects in your system than you might think. Your core system is already filled with liberally licensed libraries and programs. Case in point, since you talked about rust rewrites, original sudo is not GPL software.
Oh no, a non gpl package on my computer? How did you find out about my one weakness! I’m melting, melting! Oh, what a world, what a cruel, cruel world!
If you’re posting from Desktop Linux, your comment utilized at least 10 liberally licensed libraries. And that’s before it got into the wire. GPL packages are a MINORITY, not a majority with exceptions.
Oh no, with so few gpl packages how will i maintain an unkempt beard and bald ponytail?! How will my ketchup stained Grateful Dead tee hold together at this critical low level of gpl? At this rate my bare feet will stop stinking up the break room!
How does copyleft benefit you?
It establishes and defends intellectual property held in common by all of humanity.
N.B. held in common, not public domain. The property and right of all people for all time.
Our new present and its future requires the defense of ideas for all.
Of course, if you want to feel smug and know you’re on the winning team then be assured we are going to be losing copyleft soon.
And MIT is lacking because it doesn’t force commercial users to lie about what they do behind closed doors? Trust me, if they are so inclined, they already do plenty of that. Next, with LLM assistance, all your copyleft code is freely available for word-salad-surgery remix and rebrand with whatever license anybody wants - as it always has been, LLMs just cut the labor required to do so by a huge margin.
Yes. MIT is literally lacking that protection because it doesn’t force corporate users to lie or do their own work.
Should the fact that the powerful act with impunity when not challenged be an argument against challenging them? That’s a little facile…
Again, if you just want to feel good that the things I care about are going away, rest assured that llm output is going to remove the concept of copyleft in advance of a multipolar world where secrets and incompatibility are suddenly the order of the day.