Technology

59600 readers

4059 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

813

Mastodon's official stance on Threads (blog.joinmastodon.org)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

280 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Only a handful of partners get to access the supposedly “open” standard which Google has co-opted.

This is why God invented GPL. With GPL, you don't get to do that.

For example, right now, IBM is in the process of learning very hard lessons why they don't get to do that.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Could you explain more about IBM? I'm not as tech literate and I've been barely keeping up with the conversations about federation and EEE, what's going on with IBM?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

IBM bought RedHat, and recently decided to take ther code repos for RedHat Enterprise Linux semiprivate. They still have to offer the source code to people they give the compiled product to, but they don't have to give it publically, even though it is open source. Their claim is that they didn't like others profiting off their work by rebuilding the source an selling it. Of course RedHat seems to now be ignoring the rather large amount of open source code they didn't write that they are selling, like the Linux kernel.