this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2024
95 points (76.8% liked)

Asklemmy

43722 readers
1315 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I for one am going through quite a culture shock. I always assumed the nature of FOSS software made it immune to be confined within the policies of nations; I guess if one day the government of USA starts to think that its a security concers for china to use and contribute to core opensource software created by its citizens or based in their boundaries, they might strongarm FOSS communities and projects to make their software exclude them in someway or worse declare GPL software a threat to national security.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[โ€“] Wutchilli@feddit.org 11 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Not realy since Open source is most of the time still the best Option, and you cant realy controll Open source since there is always the option to fork Things. (For example If the US decided that China ist a NoNo the Open source Community in EU or India can do what they want since it is not under their jurisdiction)

[โ€“] Artemis_Mystique@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 days ago

but then the project loses momentum, the userbase fragments, opensource projects are fragile as they are mostly volunteer work; I guess the discussion of government threat and overreach towards opensource projects is mostly discussed in the context of cryptocurrencies and other 'disruptive' software

[โ€“] Dr_Vindaloo@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 days ago

Yes. I always thought of sanctions as being finance-related, meaning you can't transact with sanctioned groups. I figured it couldn't apply to decision-making/membership in non-profit organizations (that it might somehow violate "free speech" or some shit). Finding out this is not the case is terrifying and one more reason to hate the US (not that we needed more). This might disincentivize some people to contribute to FOSS.

[โ€“] j4k3@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago

I think the prestige of "maintainers" and contributions/control are what is being torn down. Anyone anywhere is still welcome to contribute, they are simply limited from direct control. They can still fork at any time, anyone can. Getting people to follow your fork is another thing entirely, and your open source code will still likely be incorporated directly or indirectly. The only thing that has changed is the misguided prestige that has grown around the project and is not a required or relevant part of the project as a whole.

[โ€“] Trent@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 days ago
[โ€“] digdilem@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 days ago (4 children)

Hasn't changed my view much. I already knew Linux was a company that has a legal presence in the US and so would be subject to their laws. The only real surprise is that it's taken so long to action this particular set of sanctions.

I do think the announcement was poorly handled - it should have been explained either before or immediately afterwards to cut back on the conjecture. The git notice only said that these contributors' names had been removed from the credits, not that they'd been stopped from contributing completely. Any company, including Linux, that does something they know is going to be contentious like this should bloody well get ahead of that curve and put the facts out.

The world is at war. It's not a bloody world war as we've seen before, but it is nation against nation by other means. FOSS is used so widely it is absolutely a target and nobody can be so idealistic that they cannot see the conflict, nor not know that it's constantly being attacked. Where you live does matter. I wish that wasn't the case - I truly do, but it's naive in the extreme to pretend otherwise.

load more comments (4 replies)
[โ€“] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago (3 children)
[โ€“] Artemis_Mystique@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 days ago

Nothing is devoid of global politics.

Russian maintainers were unceremoniously kicked out citing compliance issues.

load more comments (2 replies)
[โ€“] Scorpius@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Same here. For now it's only barring contributors which won't harm actual users much, but that could change in the future with the precedent this is setting.

What's the point of "FOSS" at that point if it's not so different from corporate products, being similarly vulnerable to sanctions? I could see genuine free software being relegated to piracy communities if it goes that far.

[โ€“] Karmmah@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago

FOSS gives people the option to take the original code and create their own version of it in case they don't like what the original maintainers are doing. With closed source you would be stuck and would have to look for something new.

[โ€“] kyub@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 4 days ago

I get that it's a nice daydream to think of open source projects as existing in some kind of independent, ethereal vacuum just because the code is out there and accessible from any place on Earth. But every software project is (mostly?) dependent on the jurisdiction in one country, in this case it's the US, and so their laws about sanctions and so on apply. And yes, this means that unless conflicts/wars between nations happen to cease, that we will eventually have completely separated blocks of politics/culture/military and also IT. Globalization is over. China will have their own stuff, Russia will have their own stuff, and US+EU will have their own stuff. And none of those countries should continue using high-tech products made by the other because they could be sabotaged and it might be hard to find, so it's best to not use them at all and just cook your own stuff. It's unfortunate, but bound to happen in the current state of the political world.

[โ€“] TORFdot0@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago

If someone really wants to use the contribution of the expelled maintainers they can just make their own fork. Part of the Free in FOSS is the freedom to associate or not associate with contributors.

[โ€“] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 6 points 5 days ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[โ€“] TommySoda@lemmy.world 5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

I'm out of the loop, what's the recent Linux drama? If you don't wanna type it out, you can point me in the right direction. Thanks. :)

[โ€“] pelya@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Torvalds kicked out a bunch of Russia-based kernel maintainers.

[โ€“] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 days ago (2 children)

For additional context, this was not a choice, but a requirement. The Linux Foundation is US based, and Torvalds is a US citizen. This was required due to current US sanctions against Russia, and was not just some sort of "Russia bad" thing from Torvalds that a lot of people are framing it as.

[โ€“] Caligvla@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 4 days ago

and was not just some sort of "Russia bad" thing from Torvalds

The way he announced it and responded to the critics very much made it seem like that. He legitimately needs to shut the fuck up and get a PR person to talk in his stead.

[โ€“] CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml 3 points 4 days ago

this was not a choice, but a requirement

It has been framed as such, but no evidence has been given that it was a requirement

load more comments (1 replies)
[โ€“] Dekkia@this.doesnotcut.it 3 points 4 days ago

From what I understand this wasn't a decision dictated by sanctions nor was there any strongarming. Otherwise it would've happend way earlier.

I also think splitting politics and literally anything else doesn't work and is something people who benefit from the discussion (or lack therof) made up.

Nothing is devoid of global politics.

There was more drama? I didn't even notice. They're always doing drama.

[โ€“] QuillanFae@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I just wanted to say that I have the same questions, and it's a relief to see it posted by someone with more courage. I'm too ignorant to contribute to the discussion though. I don't know how a government or private entity could pressure a FOSS project in this way, unless that pressure was put on the project's git platform. At which point the repo just moves elsewhere.

[โ€“] wewbull@feddit.uk 5 points 4 days ago

FOSS does not mean:

  • Community owned: Linux is owned by the Linux Foundation, a legal entity of the United States and subject to it's laws.
  • Obliged to accept all contributions: The owner is free to accept or reject contributions for any reason.

Nothing changed except some people are no longer responsible for maintaining parts of the source tree. Their delegated power to accept contributions was removed. They can still propose changes, but they will be reviewed by others who aren't subject aren't at risk of Russian state influence.

This isn't saying they've done anything wrong, or that they are currently under state influence, but now that they no longer have maintainer privileges the chance of the FSB knocking on their door has probably dropped 90%.

load more comments
view more: โ€น prev next โ€บ