tabular @ tabular @lemmy.world Posts 3Comments 1,185Joined 2 yr. ago
With the minimal amount of work added the combined work can now have added restrictions. They're pushover licenses.
Devs are free to choose whatever license they want but in the pathfinding problem of interacting with others then "protecting the source" is the wrong target node. Copyleft is a tool to help people.
That is what I would mean by "open source" but I can't blame the uninitiated from thinking it means something else. Consider every-day usage of the word "open" - an open door could be fully open, just have a small gap or even shut but unlocked ("come in, the door is open"). A well-meaning developer could think Unreal engine is open source because they can see the source code (the code is "open" to them). Words don't have innate definitions, they have usages.
The intent of copyleft is to ensure freedoms for the recipients of derivatives of your works. In software that means the users of forks. Copyleft restricts you to the same license (or a compatible one) to prevent you adding more restrictions. ""More permissive"" software licenses can be redistributed with the same license but often it's a more restrictive license (e.g. MIT -> proprietary).
Open source is just that
"Open" is an unspecific, a range of openness from not redistributable to (libre) free software.
Do you indend to share the code and files for your game? If not then put it where you like. If you plan to share the code then I'd be tempted to keep the license for that code in a folder with it, and move that readme to it.
own forever
Ownership implies control - being able to maintain/repair, modify or even resell.
To be in control of software you need access to it's source code, and have the right to share changes with others.
Doing it consistently seems difficult.
Permanently Deleted
As long as you follow the GPL license you can redistribute it, for free or at cost. Linux is mostly free as in freedom and usually free as in free beer.
Wikipedia says ElementaryOS has a pay what you want model. So if your image is from them then you don't have to pay (a 3rd party is free to charge you for it - bandwidth ain't free).
Given it's unrepresentative voting system I think how much is enough to be a democracy. T hot take for people that see democracy. Two parties to choose from is just one more than a clear dictatorship. If neither actually represents you then yeah it's not healthy .
Who the hell is the manufacture to decide if a remote feature no longer functions? (I'm guessing people don't rent these devices from Amazon - it's your property).
I don't need your concent, it's in your best interests - Amazon
Why 30 years, why not 10?
I watched a talk regarding a pacemaker/defibrillator incorrectly shocking a woman because she was an edge case (being younger and pregnant). She sought help from doctors who, as you may guess, knew nothing about the software. The manufactures ghosted her when asked for information, let alone source code. Some of them are wireless, vulnerable to attack. Being in control of any software running inside our bodies is an important issue to consider.
I hope no software is involved.
software update is available, heart will be restarting now
Not my games industry.
AMD made an open source driver for HDMI 2.1 but HDMI forum won't approve. They locked down the specification for 2.1 and say the driver would reveal it.
https://www.howtogeek.com/hdmi-forum-open-source-drivers-hdmi-2-1/
I don't know if an earlier version can do 8k@60HD.
Freeing old game software is better that never doing it, so that's worthy of praise. I hope this becomes a trend that other companies try to one-up each other on.
GPL for code, what about art assests?