Not being able to compare some proprietary is besides my point. Not all code is or remains hidden. I specifically wrote “if you can match” to remain neutral on that aspect.

Copied code often matches, often look the same.

Coommunicate your motivation

coom :yesyes:

It would be interesting to see whether the BSD community finds a way to keep working with Asahi under the new terms.

They could go GPL too. :)

Asahi dual-licensing would be difficult, because then it’d be out there as MIT or BSD, which they don’t want. The BSD using custom-licensed parts - the BSD projects probably don’t want that.

I am not entirely sure why the GPLv2 license wouldn’t work for the BSDs,

The GPL is a copyleft license. Derivative and combined works must be published under the same license.

You can use BSD with GPL and then publish as GPL, but you can not publish as BSD.

“Sad to see Asahi out there burning bridges for no reason… relicensing m1n1 and drivers under GPL2-or-later, seemingly without the consent of all prior contributors, under the guise of “defending against AI bad actors”, seems entirely disingenuous and misguided.”

“no reason” but there’s reasons anyway and those are “entirely disingenuous and misguided”

Too bad [their] twitter posts don’t go into actual arguments. Why is it supposedly disingenuous? Why misguided? Are there better alternatives? Probably not.

If you can compare the code and it matches you probably have a good case if the AI user can’t demonstrate it’s not coming from you.

There’s different kinds of datasets. Some respect, select and disclose licenses, others do not.

Some model trainers use any data they can, others are selective on what they train on.

It can also be a decision on principle rather than current or future enforcability. If you say “don’t copy this” and someone blatantly does, the morality is clearer than if you didn’t specifically say that.

There’s also a question of how court rulings and law may change the situation of enforcability and usage/ignorance risk.

MIT requires attribution too. GPL is, at the very least, a stronger statement of intention and demand. It can also be seen as protest or indication of a broader move of corporate AI exploitation leading to damage to the whole FOSS ecosystem, with additional restrictions being applied. Corps that would use AI now can’t use the MIT product anymore like before.

voxl was built for things like software factories that use headless VMs and sandboxes (CI, computer-use agents), usually on Xvfb with no GPU. It streams them to a plain browser tab over one WebSocket and has APIs for agents.

How is it different from RustDesk? RustDesk is an open-source alternative to TeamViewer and AnyDesk, for reaching your own computers or helping someone with theirs: you install its app on both ends, desktop or phone, and the two find each other through an ID server, then connect directly or through a relay. For that it’s the better fit, and it also shares Wayland desktops (experimentally) and Android phones, which voxl doesn’t. voxl is for desktops on servers, VMs and sandboxes: it’s one process that serves its own page, so there’s nothing to install on the viewing side and no ID or relay server to run. The stream goes wherever a URL does, can be embedded in another page and comes with the APIs agents use. RustDesk has a web client too, but it still goes through the ID and relay servers, and the self-hosted one comes with RustDesk Server Pro.

EU CE%sT

Something seems wrong with the timezone display 😅

Great article, great collection

and Germany’s public fund for open source paid €195,000 for work on it

Great to see public money in this list

Thank you for linking the not animated version. I found them quite irritating and switched back to this version.

I maintain FOSS with 1 user (me).

Where can I find your blog? ;)

I hope my drive-by PRs don’t come off in the same way.

For example, as the simplest no-description, no-comment example, when I see typos or wording errors in text on a random blog I check if there’s a direct way to contribute - to GitHub edit and submit a PR, and when there is, I do that.

There’s nothing for me to say or describe, really, and it’s not like I interacted with their project or community before or even plan to after. (Sometimes I do look into the issue tracker etc depending on the project or website. But that’s beside the raised concern.)

I see it more of a collective and open collaboration. But that’s not necessarily visible on the receiving end.

I think I still have a tab open with/about Navidome somewhere up my long list of open tabs 😬

Presumably, this only covers the operation of an instance, not the project and development of the project itself?