top_left top_right
bottom_left
Next Event: Unknown | Forum Rules | QGL Website | Event Registration
openFolder AusForums.com
iconwatfolderLineopenFolder LANs
iconwatfolderLineopenFolder QGL
iconwatfolderLineopenFolder QGL Forum
Author
Topic: Anti piracy campaign from the AU gov. Whats going on?
RuleofBooKz
Posts: 1670
Location: Melbourne, Victoria

So torrent sites were banned. Even tho there are many things that those sites host that dont break any laws at all

If books were a new thing that just came out today the corporate elite would never permit public libraries.

Yet almost all other media isn't easily available to the public in the same way books are at public libraries.

What is the difference between books and other media? We are told we cant share some media because "reasons". Usually "oh no the poor content creator needs to earn a living". Do authors not need to make a living? But we can "borrow" their works easily! Just go to a public library. In reality the mega corp needs to make $$$.

If you share a book at a public Library its "borrowing" and its not an issue.
If you share a file of media on a website its "copyright infringement" and you are in big trouble!

Why the big difference between books and other mediia???!!

Make ALL media free: books, games, movies, music etc.

Why would we make all media free? Same argument as to why we have public Libraries.

Okay so you say "Mega Corps need to make $$$ too"? So have only low res media at the public library. Corps can make their $$$ out of selling the physical box or for the download of the high res 4k version. Most are happy with the SD film or a Mp3 song version.

OR as an alternative model: make it so Public Libraries charge a dollar a day for anything. Just put it as a tax or a sub or something. Do that and ANYTHING is available to down load from the library. And no BS "watch it once cant save it" or you have an expiry or you need to go thru 10 steps ... No you can D/L it and its yours forever if you want. Save it to your local drive.

One dollar a day too much for some? You can even make it so its free to do the above if you have a concession: say if you are on the pension, or welfare or a vet for instance. All that media no charge.

TLDR: why do we have public Libraries again? "Borrow" books is fine but "copyright infringe" other media not fine?
system
--
Twisted
Posts: 12250
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

If you share a book at a public Library its "borrowing" and its not an issue.
If you share a file of media on a website its "copyright infringement" and you are in big trouble!
If you make a copy of a book and give it to other people its also copy right infringement. If you have DVD and you loan it to a friend and its called borrowing. I really don't know where you're trying to go here. If you want to share your movies around, buy DVD's and lend people the disk. Simples. If you're talking about getting movies for free, these studios are paying way too much for that to happen. All that happens is the cost transfers from you to the library. The library is funded by you through your rates, so at the end of the day your rates would go up to cover the costs. One way or another you're paying.
notgreazy
Posts: 795
Location: Other International

I was the library today for see a JP. They had movies and music for borrowing....

You need to get your story straight.

FYI pirating books is also illegal.
sLaps_Forehead
Posts: 7712
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
The LNP is Rupert's whore
Tanaka Khan
Posts: 5791
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

I support piracy cause they closed my local Blockbuster store!
Khel
Posts: 23895
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

TLDR: why do we have public Libraries again? "Borrow" books is fine but "copyright infringe" other media not fine?


Sounds to me like you're just trying to find a way to justify pirating s***. When you torrent something you're not 'borrowing' it, you're not taking temporary ownership of it and preventing anyone else from watching it until you give it back, you're making a copy. If you made a copy of a book, it would also be copyright infringement.

If you want some way to temporarily borrow or rent a movie, theres plenty of avenues for that: Google Play, Itunes, the XBox store, all let you rent movies on demand. If you want it for free, then get a job you bum its like $6.
Tollaz0r!
Posts: 18439
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Dude, pirating s*** is stealing. Accept it.

That doesn't mean you have to stop pirating or anything, just accept you do a bit of thievery and stop trying to make s*** up and twist reality around. If you have to go to that much trouble to justify your thievery then perhaps you should just stop pinching other peoples s***, you're just not morally cut out for it. That's OK too.

infi
Posts: 23762
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

Find a new library
RuleofBooKz
Posts: 1671
Location: Melbourne, Victoria

Hey Tollaz0r! but its not Stealing. Stealing something that is about 20 to 50 bucks is a small crime. "Petty theft".

Borrowing a file that someone decided should not be borrowed is "copyright infringement". Its about 100X more serious than "stealing"

I can argue the other stuff but I haven't felt the need due to lack of any valid counter argument.

Missed you guys ;)
fpot
Posts: 26028
Location: Gold Coast, Queensland

How about the counter-argument that if all media was free what would fund its creation?
Tollaz0r!
Posts: 18440
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

Hey Tollaz0r! but its not Stealing. Stealing something that is about 20 to 50 bucks is a small crime. "Petty theft".


Dude, it's f***ing thievery. It's stealing, pilfering, whatever. It's the same thing, you are taking s*** from someone that doesn't belong to you and not paying for it.

It doesn't matter how much it costs, that's only relevant for the punishment received for doing the same act of pinching s***.

Why can't you accept that you're a thief?
sLaps_Forehead
Posts: 7713
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

How about the counter-argument that if all media was free what would fund its creation?


Hence why movies are so s*** nowerdays.
Lithium
Posts: 489
Location: Rockhampton, Queensland
I pay for netflix no worries. But I will continue to pirate every netflix show until they allow me to watch it in VLC and make it a simpler process to download to my device. f*** them.

Tollaz0r!
Posts: 18441
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
I pay for Netflix and I've found it just so much more convenient to watch something on Netflix than go to the trouble of acquiring something. Mostly because Netflix catalog is large enough and updated enough.

Although if a must-watch show isn't available on it, then I might think about doing something to watch it.

I did like when it was super easy to get oversea's Netflix stuff offerings, now it's too much of a pain in the arse to circumvent the geo-block that it's just easier to get whatever it is elsewise.
Khel
Posts: 23896
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

I can argue the other stuff but I haven't felt the need due to lack of any valid counter argument.


So, you're full of s*** then, glad we got that sorted out.

You may want to look up 'borrowing' in a dictionary though, I don't think this word means what you think it means.
BladeRunner
Posts: 2768
Location: Queensland

I torrent. Having things cheaper or made available in better ways helps. I also pay for stuff. It depends on what the thing in question is. I could claim that it's about fighting the big corporations and their bulls***, which it can be, but it's also about because I can. I think there are legit concerns to be had when it comes to all this stuff though.
paveway
Posts: 21360
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

I can argue the other stuff but I haven't felt the need due to lack of any valid counter argument.


this is why we thought you were a knob last time

ps. you're wrong too
Captain Lateral
Posts: 4785
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Since when is copyright infringement stealing?

Stealing means depriving someone else of their own property, without that individuals permission. I'm not stealing your food by making my mac and cheese the same way you do. I'm not stealing media by having my 1s and 0s having the same pattern as Finding Nemo.



FaceMan
Posts: 12903
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
The Dutch firm Ecory was commissioned to research the impact of piracy for several months, eventually submitting a 304-page report to the EU in May 2015. The report concluded that: "In general, the results do not show robust statistical evidence of displacement of sales by online copyright infringements. That does not necessarily mean that piracy has no effect but only that the statistical analysis does not prove with sufficient reliability that there is an effect


it might even increase Sales
https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2017/09/the-eu-suppressed-a-300-page-study-that-found-piracy-doesnt-harm-sales/
Raven
Posts: 9503
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Has anyone found sites to have become unblocked in the last few days?

I used to have RSS feeds set up to eztv, and noticed they had started updating again last night when I got home. For the last few weeks, the site had been completely blocked.
anonymousxvi
Posts: 13
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
I think the monetary system has failed us and prices for some things are way to expensive like where i live it should be about $110 per week to rent but its not its $200

I'm not an advocate for communism sociliasm marxism monarchism dictatorship etc.

But there is a better way it does have a name and i think its a better way of living its called the venus project

Also as for piracy i respect they gave people that are poor the chance to educate themselves and better there lives.

But some greedy f*** has made everything about money your life is so controlled by money that people suffer because of other peoples greed. We don't need mansions thats a waste of valuable land. What we need is a system of respect and no money where people work together to achieve what could be considered paradise on earth its not perfect but it makes sense i believe the earth should be commonly owned by everyone on the planet not just in the hands of the few.

Cheers to the pirates for all the books they use to put out.

People don't really want money they want access to things when they want them.



last edited by anonymousxvi at 07:47:31 02/Oct/17
taggs
Posts: 6519
Location:

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter
infi
Posts: 23783
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter


he also has a geocities site
anonymousxvi
Posts: 14
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
People pirate stuff because they can't afford it, it's as simple as that and sometimes because just because it is free. However i'd say its mostly because they can't afford it.

I use openoffice because i can't afford to buy microsoft office. Thats an example.
Raven
Posts: 9505
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
It's not so much that they can't afford it, but that they don't feel the value of it is there for the price being asked, given all circumstances. I can afford Spotify and Netflix, but I don't need it. In the same way I could take that money, cut it out of my expenditure, and direct it towards some other media - but I might not feel buying things that way deliver value. When there's elements of a budget you can cut out an substitute for something else, it's not fair to say you "can't" afford this or that, it's usually that you don't see the value, relative to other things you put in to discretionary spending.
anonymousxvi
Posts: 15
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Raven i disagree the value is still there i'd choose microsoft office over openoffice any day.

The value is there i just can't afford it.
infi
Posts: 23784
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

he is saying that if you really valued it you would not spend money on something else in order to buy office. so your spending decision shows you dont value office that much.
Tollaz0r!
Posts: 18456
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

Since when is copyright infringement stealing?

Stealing means depriving someone else of their own property, without that individuals permission. I'm not stealing your food by making my mac and cheese the same way you do. I'm not stealing media by having my 1s and 0s having the same pattern as Finding Nemo.


Unless you are autistic we both know that it is clearly stealing.

It is clear that you are expected to pay for the experiencing of a particular piece of entertainment that cost money to produce.
By acquiring this entertainment without paying for it, you are purposefully and knowingly circumventing the extremely well known social expectation that you should be paying for it.

Therefor you are depriving several potential proprietors of their financial right of exchange of the piece of entertainment for a piece of your wealth.

You are robbing them of their share of the exchange. You got the entertainment, but you did not pay for it.

You stole it, fair and square.

It doesn't matter if it is a physical object.

If you go to a theater with real people acting out the play. You are expected to pay.

You see, it seems you misunderstand what 'property' is. It doesn't have to be a physical object. Intellectual property is an example of that, and you can indeed steal intellectual property. People can sometimes go to great lengths to make sure that doesn't happen.

Accept the fact that it is theft. If you pirate entertainment, you are thieving it. WHY you are doing so, is where you ethical debates should be, as you can't argue the fact you are a thief if you pirate something and don't pay the proprietor for that property.
Tollaz0r!
Posts: 18457
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

People pirate stuff because they can't afford it, it's as simple as that and sometimes because just because it is free. However i'd say its mostly because they can't afford it.


People pirate s*** for all sorts of reasons. Doing it because they can't afford it, is just one of several reasons I can think of.
Here is another one:
People do it as a 'f*** you' to the man.
Another:
People do it because why pay for something that they can get free, that money can be used elsewhere.
Another:
A person may believe that all entertainment should be free and see stealing it as a extension of their 'right' to the entertainment such a belief would lead to.
Another:
People pirate something because it is simply unavailable in any other way.

I'm sure there are many more.

You thinking seems to be rather limited to your own experience, not everyone thinks like you do. Not even close.
notgreazy
Posts: 813
Location: Other International



Unless you are autistic we both know that it is clearly stealing.

It is clear that you are expected to pay for the experiencing of a particular piece of entertainment that cost money to produce.
By acquiring this entertainment without paying for it, you are purposefully and knowingly circumventing the extremely well known social expectation that you should be paying for it.

Therefor you are depriving several potential proprietors of their financial right of exchange of the piece of entertainment for a piece of your wealth.

You are robbing them of their share of the exchange. You got the entertainment, but you did not pay for it.

You stole it, fair and square.

It doesn't matter if it is a physical object.

If you go to a theater with real people acting out the play. You are expected to pay.

You see, it seems you misunderstand what 'property' is. It doesn't have to be a physical object. Intellectual property is an example of that, and you can indeed steal intellectual property. People can sometimes go to great lengths to make sure that doesn't happen.

Accept the fact that it is theft. If you pirate entertainment, you are thieving it. WHY you are doing so, is where you ethical debates should be, as you can't argue the fact you are a thief if you pirate something and don't pay the proprietor for that property.

I am reading a book, I can't remember the name but it's dry as hell but really interesting. It makes the argument that Intellectual "Property" laws should not be founded on the same principals as real estate laws or physical objects. There's a slew of arguments for this idea, the best (maybe most relatable?) one imo is physical object law takes into account the loss of the object. You are deprived of it and therefore something is physically lost or gained. An example would be the loss of the car, you can get to work now. A more classic example is loss of land results in lost productivity, no crops, etc. With intellectual "property" there is no deprivation, there is no associated loss of function. There is loss of potential profits but this is distinct from the physical loss of an item.

You're using the current laws which are founded on the idea of loss of physical property to say people are stealing. But they're not, they're pirating. Which is distinct from stealing. Of course they're both illegal and unethical, that's not up for debate here. I'm not sure what anonymousxvi's point is in pointing out the difference between stealing and piracy. They're both not good for society in general.

But the current IP laws are restrictive and archaic. They hinder progress and overall are more likely to slow progress and innovation.
Tollaz0r!
Posts: 18462
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

You're using the current laws which are founded on the idea of loss of physical property to say people are stealing.


Regardless of law, the social convention is that entertainment is a product that is expected to be paid for, unless the proprietor has allowed free use of it (or another law covers free use of it).

A person who is taking something from another and is expected to pay for, but does not pay for it, is robbing the other person.

You can get technical with the exact meanings of property and theft, however it is certainly clear that getting entertainment items without paying for it, when expected to do so, is violating social norms in such a away that it is predominately viewed as at least a type of theft by most people.

It's theft.


But the current IP laws are restrictive and archaic. They hinder progress and overall are more likely to slow progress and innovation.


These are arguments about changing the laws and reevaluating the social norms of what is expected. It is an argument about potentially seeing 'piracy' as a normal and lawful act and thus no expectation of payment is involved and the general social perspective would be that entertainment belongs to no-one and thus cannot be stolen.

As it currently stands, it's theft. If you want to campaign for this type of change, that's cool. However you can't change something without acknowledging what it currently is.


last edited by Tollaz0r! at 16:11:37 03/Oct/17
Twisted
Posts: 12265
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

I thought this was a pretty funny write up around the irony of pirating a game :)
Khel
Posts: 23913
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

Seems to me that the people who argue its not stealing and want to be able to pirate everything, are only ever thinking of it from their own consumer-centric point of view. Imagine it from the other side for a moment, you've developed a piece of software (game or otherwise) with some truly revolutionary ideas in it, and you've poured every cent you have into getting it done. You'd like to not go bankrupt right? You'd like to make some money off this thing you've poured years of your life into and all your money into? You'd like some protection of your intellectual property so someone can't just rip off your ideas and get rich off them while screwing you over?

Theres always more than one side to things, try thinking from a few different points of view instead of just "I'm an entitled brat and everything should be free for me".
BladeRunner
Posts: 2782
Location: Queensland

Good thing I didn't download Game Dev Tycoon then lol. Good luck to them though.
Tollaz0r!
Posts: 18463
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

You'd like some protection of your intellectual property so someone can't just rip off your ideas and get rich off them while screwing you over?


For me, it is less so about protecting the idea and not allowing other people to use the idea in their own way (clone or not). It's about the specific piece of work that is being consumed without any exchange of wealth to the proprietor of that piece.

Effort was put into creating something that someone else is using for their own entertainment, it's fair that people are expected to pay for that consumption of entertainment.

It gets even more murky when you start to consider the idea behind the work and if that should be expected to be paid for to be used elsewhere by someone else putting the effort in to make a piece of work with that idea.
PornoPete
Posts: 2796
Location: Melbourne, Victoria

It makes the argument that Intellectual "Property" laws should not be founded on the same principals as real estate laws or physical objects. There's a slew of arguments for this idea, the best (maybe most relatable?) one imo is physical object law takes into account the loss of the object. You are deprived of it and therefore something is physically lost or gained. An example would be the loss of the car, you can get to work now. A more classic example is loss of land results in lost productivity, no crops, etc. With intellectual "property" there is no deprivation, there is no associated loss of function.


Just fyi, IP is not founded on the same principles as physical property.

There are a number of justifications but this one

There is loss of potential profits but this is distinct from the physical loss of an item.


Is the key one. The loss of potential profits sits at the core of the justification of IP. IP is anti-competitive, there no confusion about this in policy circles or in the law itself.

The argument is that if people can't profit from their intellectual labour, they just won't do it. It is therefore a case where a traditional market will actually fail to deliver goods and services because there is no way to control free riding absent legal intervention.

The argument goes like this.

The profit motive will incentive the creation of more intellectual works than would be created if there was no profit motive.

So it is true someone stealing an idea doesn't deprive the owner of the idea, but it does also have the ability to render the idea worthless which undermines the incentive to create it in the first place.

There is a fairly substantial body of economic evidence to back the effectiveness of copyright incentivizing creative works.

WIPO has a bunch of data on this in relation to Plant Breeders Rights in particular (the argument is essentially the same, seeds are easy to take without depriving the owner). The graphs speak for themselves. (they have buckets of data on all forms of IP obviously but those graphs paint the picture most clearly.)
Hogfather
Posts: 16791
Location: Cairns, Queensland

There is a fairly substantial body of economic evidence to back the effectiveness of copyright incentivizing creative works.

Without IP protection there is no scarcity, basically.

Its the bit that always makes me scratch my head about the future of FOSS. What exactly is the end game there?
anonymousxvi
Posts: 17
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Some nice points tollazor that i neglected to think of

Paying you some credit where its due.
trog
AGN Admin
Posts: 39237
Location: Other International

Without IP protection there is no scarcity, basically.

Its the bit that always makes me scratch my head about the future of FOSS. What exactly is the end game there?
freeeeeeeeeeeeeeedom
notgreazy
Posts: 814
Location: Other International

Both tollazor and pornopete make some great points.

Some nice points tollazor that i neglected to think of

Paying you some credit where its due.

Oh shiiit we've convinced him.
Just fyi, IP is not founded on the same principles as physical property.
I disagree, there's evidence that it's founded in property law or the conceptually the same. It gets muddy because IP law arose in multiple parts of the developed world around the same time (USA, England, France, Germany).

Its the bit that always makes me scratch my head about the future of FOSS. What exactly is the end game there?
There is a place for FOSS and it mostly resides in science. But isn't part of the FOSS argument similar to dedicated server software argument? Once the company decides to shutter up, you're left in the dark both in using the software and in accessing it. Sometimes that's where piracy is comes handy for legitimate purposes.
PornoPete
Posts: 2801
Location: Melbourne, Victoria

I disagree, there's evidence that it's founded in property law or the conceptually the same. It gets muddy because IP law arose in multiple parts of the developed world around the same time (USA, England, France, Germany).


I'm not sure I agree with that. Physical property has a natural excludability to it. You can pick it up and tell everyone to get lost, or off your lawn as the case maybe.

Copyright and Patent are English inventions. copyright derives from the the Statute of Anne in around 1700 and was created under pressure because of the printing press (I'm sure that you can find parallel developments elsewhere but the English law dominates the landscape now). Patents come from 'letters patent' from the monarch granting a monopoly over a process, though letters patent address things other than property. The statute of monopolies from the 1600s banned monopolies except for patents. The main reason patents exist is to reduce trade secrets, hence every single patent system I know of if there is prior secret commercial use it will invalidate the patent.

real estate, I suppose you could say is similar if you go back far enough and look into radical title, but that s*** starts getting into the divine right of the monarch to rule and grant land to who she sees fit. It seems pretty different to me.

but I can accept there are substantial practical similarities, you can buy and sell it, you can exclude people from it, you can licence it (rent it) and so on. it is also undeniable that most legal reform in relation to real estate is also driven by market considerations.

But I think the economic considerations drive IP law in a way that does not apply to real property law. a market couldn't form around IP without the legal framework, that plainly isn't true for real property.

FOSS is a strange one. I guess its important to note that copyright enables the FOSS movement rather than hurts it. the creative commons licence is a copyright licence and if there were no copyright law all those strings about crediting the author, must publish your modifications on the same terms etc would be meaningless. so FOSS does lean on copyright, it's just that what passes for 'value' might not be monetary.

Obviously none of this is to say that the current laws are perfect. I can't see a valid reason for copyright to last for the life of the author + 75 years in relation to software code for example. Even for movies and books that seems a little generous.
trog
AGN Admin
Posts: 39238
Location: Other International

There is a place for FOSS and it mostly resides in science. But isn't part of the FOSS argument similar to dedicated server software argument? Once the company decides to shutter up, you're left in the dark both in using the software and in accessing it. Sometimes that's where piracy is comes handy for legitimate purposes.
That is indeed part of the argument, but ultimately it ties into the freedom argument. The Free Software Foundation's about and what is free software pages are a pretty good summary but honestly I think it's hard to sum up all the potential impacts of the 'freedom' argument in a few mere words.
Phooks
Posts: 3252
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

Anyone know where to buy legit office keys cheap online? eBay?
notgreazy
Posts: 832
Location: Other International

PornoPete: I'll be honest, I don't know enough to continue this discussion. Though I find it fascinating :)

On the topic of FOSS:
FOSS is a strange one. I guess its important to note that copyright enables the FOSS movement rather than hurts it. the creative commons licence is a copyright licence and if there were no copyright law all those strings about crediting the author, must publish your modifications on the same terms etc would be meaningless. so FOSS does lean on copyright, it's just that what passes for 'value' might not be monetary.

That's true, FOSS does use copyright licensing but not in the same vain as commercial entities. It's sometimes used to keep projects and all forks public and free. I think the term used is copyleft, and GNU uses this type of license (GPL). A lot of science folks avoid this license as they view it as restrictive and prefer modified BSD license. I guess the idea behind GPL is to force an equal playing field with commercial companies. It's not all take take, they need to give back and with this type of license they are forced to keep projects open, for ever.

That is indeed part of the argument, but ultimately it ties into the freedom argument. The Free Software Foundation's about and what is free software pages are a pretty good summary but honestly I think it's hard to sum up all the potential impacts of the 'freedom' argument in a few mere words.
It's weird that FOSS requires justification. I think closed software requires more justification and why it should exist in the first place. Linux and Unix/GNU are both licensed under GPL and of course they're the backbone of nearly everything that we call the internet. Unfortunately freedom seems to have a weird connotation, imo it's less about MAH FREEDOM-style argument and more about innovation. Open software means continual improvements.

Having said that, it's ironic that GPL is perceived as super restrictive and BSD is preferred in science (from what I've read anyway). Here is an interesting blog about GPL vs BSD within the context of scientific software.

The ideal situation is sharing of knowledge between the private and public sectors.
Hogfather
Posts: 16798
Location: Cairns, Queensland

It's weird that FOSS requires justification. I think closed software requires more justification and why it should exist in the first place.

Umm, you being deliberately obtuse here? Don't want to waste keystrokes otherwise..
trog
AGN Admin
Posts: 39251
Location: Other International

I guess the idea behind GPL is to force an equal playing field with commercial companies.
Just to nitpick: the idea behind GPL is more about enforcing /freedom/ because it requires you as part of the license to allow everyone else to have that same freedom with any changes you make. It's kind of funny but there are some people that think this license is LESS free, because it has this condition on it.
Umm, you being deliberately obtuse here? Don't want to waste keystrokes otherwise..
I think that is pretty much what Richard Stallman thinks :D
notgreazy
Posts: 833
Location: Other International


Umm, you being deliberately obtuse here? Don't want to waste keystrokes otherwise..

No but a tad retaliatory.
Hogfather
Posts: 16799
Location: Cairns, Queensland

Fun fact: this website is not open source. There's tonnes of coders here, we could smash the famous todo list and help implement lots of new features if we could do pull requests.

Why is it not, when one of its owners is massively pro FOSS?
trog
AGN Admin
Posts: 39257
Location: Other International

haha the same reason most code isn't open source - sheer morbid embarrassment that someone else might read the code I wrote

We did talk about it years ago but it was kind of tricky because of stuff we'd licensed to Telstra. I'd certainly like to see it done but it would require a significant effort.
notgreazy
Posts: 836
Location: Other International

Fun fact: this website is not open source. There's tonnes of coders here, we could smash the famous todo list and help implement lots of new features if we could do pull requests.

Why is it not, when one of its owners is massively pro FOSS?
haha the same reason most code isn't open source - sheer morbid embarrassment that someone else might read the code I wrote

We did talk about it years ago but it was kind of tricky because of stuff we'd licensed to Telstra. I'd certainly like to see it done but it would require a significant effort.

Hahaha.

Sure you can point to any project and say why is this one not open source and there can be any number of reasons. At the same time I can point to Google's Tensorflow, or Facebook's React or LineageOS or LibreOffice (RIP OpenOffice) or cURL or or or.
Hogfather
Posts: 16801
Location: Cairns, Queensland

haha the same reason most code isn't open source - sheer morbid embarrassment that someone else might read the code I wrote

Isn't that what FOSS is (at least partially) supposed to fix, though?

We did talk about it years ago but it was kind of tricky because of stuff we'd licensed to Telstra. I'd certainly like to see it done but it would require a significant effort.

So ... FOSS and actual business don't mix that well. Who'da thunk it ;)
At the same time I can point to Google's Tensorflow, or Facebook's React or LineageOS or LibreOffice (RIP OpenOffice) or cURL or or or.

Fueken Google are sneaky bitches about FOSS. Nothing they actually make money from is Open, but they get lots of kudos from the FOSS community because reasons.

'Oh, but Android!' you cry. None of the actual Google apps are open, you pay a license fee to pack those in. Android was cynically opened just to s*** on Apple's smartphone market share.
trog
AGN Admin
Posts: 39259
Location: Other International

So ... FOSS and actual business don't mix that well. Who'da thunk it ;)
Most of our stack was FOSS so that wasn't the problem. It was just weird contract arcana that wasn't worth the time or effort to resolve really. The problem now is (afaik) noone really hacks on the code any more & it would take a lot of effort for someone to do it (there are many excellent articles by developers of abandonware about why it was too much effort to open source; I was always a bit skeptical about them but now I totally sympathise)
Hogfather
Posts: 16803
Location: Cairns, Queensland

Most of our stack was FOSS so that wasn't the problem

Was (somewhat obviously) referring to opening the source of AGN's own code not the tool base and stack used.

The reality of opening source for many businesses just doesn't stack up for all sorts of reasons, and not just embarrassment.

Case in point, there are few (if any?) FOSS billionaires, amid lots and lots and lots of tech success stories. Closed source operations have delivered Scrooge McDuck piles of money for the likes of Microsoft Apple Amazon Atlassian Facebook Twitter PayPal eBay and Google, while Linus whose kernel actually powers most of the Internet! ... is famous with the nerds. Tim Berners-Lee. Dennis Ritchie. Larry Wall. Rasmus Lerdorf. Stallman. f***ing Dimmy's punchable face begging for money every damn year.

Bigly people. Changed the world. Didn't get rich. Free code is nice. Getting paid is nicer.
system
--
Not a new post since your last visit.
New Post Since your last visit
Back To Forum
Advertise with Us | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
© Copyright 2001-2017 AusGamers Pty Ltd. ACN 093 772 242.
Hosted by Mammoth Networks - Australian VPS Hosting
Web development by Mammoth Media.