Come one come all to the Lemmy-verse! It’s nice and cozy here, we do have some “bad parts of town” but you can do an instance block and not deal with them lol

For your memes we have !memes@lemmy.world if you like sciency posts mander.xyz has some excellent communities (communities=subreddits) like !science@mander.xyz and !biology@mander.xyz and for a meme science combo theres always the fantastic !science_memes@mander.xyz

You can also drop a shit(post) off at !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world or hang out at !onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone (though you do have to post before you leave that one!)

There’s much more around as well!

Obligatory, fuck Spez

  • 9bananas@lemmy.worldEnglish
    72·
    5 hours ago

    there’s no contradiction, because the developer does not matter. that’s the entire point of FOSS.

    it could be written by a literal nazi (not that there’s a big difference between brown and red fascists) and it wouldn’t matter one bit.

    that’s the entire beauty of FOSS!

    we ALL own the code.

    if Dessalines ever stops developing it, anyone can take over.

    if Dessalines implements code the community at large doesn’t like, anyone can create a fork and change that specific part and continue from there.

    we can see exactly what the code does, and can create new versions at any point.

    that was always the reason behind decentralized, open source networks:

    nobody can own it.

    • rahEnglish
      41·
      5 hours ago

      we ALL own the code

      No you don’t. As a user, you don’t get a share of the copyright of free software, you get a license (permission) from the copyright owner. The copyright owner owns the code, not all of you.

      • 9bananas@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        4 hours ago

        i mean…yeah? kinda? on a technicality?

        Developers that use our General Public Licenses protect your rights with two steps: (1) assert copyright on the software, and (2) offer you this License which gives you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify the software.

        you assert the first part as fact and then kinda skip over the second part…at least that’s how i read your comment.

        yes, the copyright owner (the creator) “owns” the work…but then immediately uses said ownership to explicitly allow everyone else to do just about anything with it, short of claiming it as one’s own creation.

        you are the best kind of correct, but only that kind.