GPL vs BSD, a matter of sustainability

Re:GPL vs BSD, a matter of sustainability by kstenerud on Friday February 08, 2013 @09:01AM (#5187852)

GPL operates on the premise that people are generally selfish and evil, and will never contribute back unless forced to.

BSD operates on the premise that people are generally decent, and many (though not all) will contribute back on principle.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:GPL vs BSD, a matter of sustainability by skore on Friday February 08, 2013 @09:23AM (#5187963)

Quite to the contrary. I prefer GPL code and don't think people are generally selfish and evil.

I do think that "the market" does that to people - It is often very profitable to be selfish and evil and the question is whether you have it in you to allow your fellow humans to fall into that trap or not. And whether you think it's good for society that this mechanic of the market exerts so much influence.

I have chosen against that. Might be foolish, but I think it's rather pragmatic.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:GPL vs BSD, a matter of sustainability by wildgift on Friday February 08, 2013 @10:00AM (#5188136)

Didn't FreeBSD have some problem with fundraising recently?

Apple used FreeBSD to create Darwin, OS X and iOS. Did they end up contributing back?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:GPL vs BSD, a matter of sustainability by onedognight on Friday February 08, 2013 @02:33PM (#5189668)

> Apple used FreeBSD to create Darwin, OS X and iOS. Did they end up contributing back?

Yes, quite a bit. An example, FreeBSD recently switched from gcc to clang as their main compiler. clang was an Apple project.

[ Parent | on HN ]