BSD license:

BSD license:
>hey you wanna use my code? sure thing bud

GPL license:
>uhm excuse me, if you're going to use my code, you must bla bla, you must also make it public for everyone to see, you must also not sell it, you must also etc

Other urls found in this thread:

cio.com/article/3112582/linux/linus-torvalds-says-gpl-was-defining-factor-in-linuxs-success.html
gcc.gnu.org/wiki/History
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

GNU license is superior.
You're all autistic bitches fighting each other while the Chad GNU is out there fucking your oneitis.

So BSDfags are submissive cucks that let anyone steamroll over them?

GPL license is the equivalent of communism, cuckoldry and beating someone up because they want to be a little bit different

You can immediately tell when someone prefers GPL, that their daddy and mommy beat them up every day.

you can sell GPL licensed stuff. I could sell the GCC compiler if I felt like it

>GPLfags are so insecure they need to make sure when somebody uses their code, they must also make it public so that they can see why their competition is assfucking them

>GPL is communism
That would be BSD

>BSD ecosystem
>Anyone can just come along and expropriate your private property and there's nothing you can do about it.

>GPL ecosystem
>Anyone can enjoy the fruits of your labour but they also contribute to the community and share their hard work

GPL is anarcho-capitalism, BSD is just straight out communism.

This

>can I borrow it to him
It's called "lend it to him", fucking illiterate pajeets.

yes, and they enjoy it

Nothing about the BSD license suggests it's communism.

GPL on the other hand...

>Nothing about the BSD license suggests it's communism.
Except I just explained it in my post, retard.

I guess BSDfags are the same kind of people that show up at refugee camps with Refugees Welcome pins and talk about how rape is cultural enrichment as long as the perpetrator is brown and from a different culture.

No, you didn't.

>Anyone can just come and expropriate your intellectual (private) property for their own good and there's nothing you can do about it
I did.

BSDfags wouldn't care.

GPLfagsg would encourage immigrations because you have to be equal and fair.

>BSDfags wouldn't care.
Nihilistic fuckers.

You are fucking retarded and clearly don't understand what communism is.

Coming from a retard who just claimed that GPL is communism, top fucking kek.

Also
>you're fucking retarded
Not an argument, lol.

saying stupid shit that has no connection to the terms and words you're using to draw an analogy or comparison is not an argument either, you fucking troglodyte chink

>BSD = everyone should work for free
>GPL = you may use the work of others for free, only if you also give back derivative work as payment

Gee, I wonder which one is the communist one here.

you seem to have twisted idea about what's communism

>BSD
>everyone should work for free

????????????????????????

>being this emotionally invested in licensing flamewars...
Calm down before you get an aneurysm.

It's called BSDM for a reason

>call you stupid because you say stupid shit
>"bro dont get mad calm down xDD"

The absolute state of GPLturds.

Are you implying that private property and other means of production isn't seized by the proletariate under communism?

That is similar to what communism does.
And what GPL encourages.

yes... and that's what GPL does, because it enforces license on derived work

Yes, if your work is licensed under BSD, anyone can use it for their own stuff and sell it and give absolutely nothing to you.

You've essentially just given away your work for free and for others to profit from.

Retards. The GPL does not allow your work to be seized.

>say the GPL is communism because parroting Sup Forums memes
>someone says that BSD is for cucks and is the actual communist license
>mentally derails and starts bashing the keyboard in frustration
BSDcucks everyone.

No one forces you to put BSD license on your work, you have a freedom to choose to share. GPL forces if it's derived work.

The Minix in Intel spyware chips just showed wonderfully what a cuck license BSD really is.

BSD fans want to get raped by their own creations.

>No one forces you to put BSD license on your work, you have a freedom to choose to share
What you're really saying here, Schlomo Goldstein, is that if you take someone's work licensed under BSD and base your own work on it, you are under no obligation to give anything back.

>GPL forces if it's derived work.
As payment for using the original work, yes.

The fact that a multibillion company like Sony can basically put FreeBSD on their PS4's and make AMD create a custom integrated graphic card driver and sell it with great profit, while the FreeBSD community will NEVER EVER see Sony contributing upstream or any AMD drivers, really shows how fucked up the BSD ecosystem is.

That's called freedom and capitalism. What others do with your shit is not up to you to decide. And if someone takes what you made and improves it and sells it, then it means you lost.

>working for free for others to profit from is called freedom
>slavery is freedom

>forcing someone to give back and contribute to freedom is slavery
>freedom is slavery


Also
>And if someone takes what you made and improves it and sells it, then it means you lost.
Imagine being this cucked that you accept other people taking your work and making a profit from it.

you literally described communism with GPL
bsd would be plain anarchism

cio.com/article/3112582/linux/linus-torvalds-says-gpl-was-defining-factor-in-linuxs-success.html

BSD = anarchism (the chaotic bad kind)
GPL = anarcho-capitalism (the structured, NAP, good kind)

>(((capitalism)))

where in the BSD license does it say you work for free, you retarded ape

BSD is anarcho-capitalism, GPL is socialism. GPL wouldn't be communism if we are talking about totalitarian communism. GPL would be closer to Leninism if anything.

This.

BSDfags can parrot "gpl is communism" memes all they want, but there are concrete real life examples of why BSD creates a bad ecosystem meanwhile GPL does not .

>where in the BSD license does it say you work for free

Right here:

>Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification, are permitted [...]

...

and proprietary software created even more powerful ecosystems
we actually like real freedom

>implying the exchange of money is a requirement in a capitalist system
>implying the exchange of intellectual property and/or services can not substitute hard money in a capitalist system

Freebsd and openbsd will always enjoy slow development because there is virtually no incentive to contribute back. Companies just take the best bits out of *bsd codebases and laugh at the cucks for doing it for free.

>and proprietary software created even more powerful ecosystems
That's an oxymoron. Proprietary software is not community-driven, but is the intellectual property of individual companies.

>exchange
non-ironically a spook
you don't have to exchange
humans made that concept up

but Apple Ecosystem > GNU

>you don't have to exchange
With GPL you do, it's a premise for the system.

>humans made that concept up
Just like they made capitalism up. Capitalism isn't anarchy, you know. It is the opposite, a structured system.

I unironically enjoy using Apple products (I'm using my MBP right now).

Apple has contributed to free software in the past, such as releasing their Mach-based kernel under FreeBSD license as well as releasing all the NeXT stuff under FreeBSD license. They've also, in the past, contributed to both LLVM and FreeBSD as well as webkit.

But that doesn't mean that they've created an ecosystem for free as in freedom software. Quite contrary, actually, as they push proprietary tools and platforms quite hard and it's only possible to take part of the Apple ecosystem if you use these tools and platforms. Most of their multimedia creation software, for example, is proprietary. So is xcode and almost their entire development suite.

BSD is for cucks, you are basically working for tech corporations for free.

I really hope that the anti-GPL astroturfs on this board are trolling and baiting, and not actually sincere. There's should be no doubt in anyone's mind about the success of open and free software has enjoyed because of the GPL license. The Linux kernel is probably the single largest collaborative software project there is, and it has only been possible because of its license.

quality-wise yes
completeness-wise no

>Sup Forumstards everywhere
Dear God...When they will give a break?

BSD license: Public torrent trackers
You only seed back if you want.

GPL license: Private torrent trackers but without faggotory to join
You have follow the rules community to don't get fuck up

>It's called BSDM for a reason
holy kek

dudes it just licences, just use the one you want and stop saying bullshit about commusim and anarchism

BSD license:
>freedom is being allowed to do whatever the fuck you want, like rape or genocide
GPL license:
>freedom is being allowed to do whatever the fuck you want, as long as you don't infringe on other people's freedom
Any proprietary license:
>freedom is slavery

...

Successful things created with GPL:
>Apache
>SQL
>Python
Successful things created with BSD:
>PS 3
>PS 4
>PS 5
>XBox #
>XBox #+1
>XBox Latest#
>many more consoles
>smart TVs
>IoT devices
>uncountable software projects
>even the binary blobs in your Linux kernel were created from BSD code
What's your excuse? It just works.

>Successful things created with BSD:
>>PS 3
>>PS 4
>>PS 5
>>XBox #
>>XBox #+1
>>XBox Latest#
>>many more consoles
>>smart TVs
>>IoT devices
>>uncountable software projects
What's the point if all of these ended up being proprietary? It's like a negro being proud that a modern corporation is wealthy because they've built built it's fortune on the back of his slave ancestors.

BDS License

>OpenSSL: starving for funding, Google throws them a bone after heartbleed then rips off what they can for BoringSSL
>FreeBSD kernel: nobody used it except Apple to rip off the kernel for Darwin and sell it for gajillions
>BerkleyDB: garbage java database nobody ever heard of
>Go: sad language invented by serial rip-off company Google for their code monkey employees who can't be trusted with Generics

GPL
>GCC: the fastest best supported C compiler on Earth
>Linux kernel: well funded by Linux foundation. Linus Torvalds set for life
>MySQL: most popular free database in existence
>Java: most popular language, purchased by Oracle, and promptly ripped off by BSD loving Google

...

>Makes a shitty meme comparing licenses to good/bad dads
>Tells everyone else they have daddy issues
Projection the post.
Where did it all go wrong user? Where did your dad touch you?

Here's a good idea

Use whatever fucking license you want to

Listing all the times you got cucked is not exactly helping your case, user.

>implying locked in hardware vendors use BSD code because it's good.
GPL game console would mean emulation for every new console as soon as it hit the maket.

BSD
>musl: fast, modern and lightweight libc
>llvm: modern compiler backend used used by numerous languages, is built toward providing base for derived work
>minix: the most common operating system on Earth
>PostgreSQL, SQLite: popular databases with excelent codebase

GPL
>gcc, glibc: flow, bloated, has to use EEE tactics to stay relevant, obfuscates codebase to prevent any derived work
>Guile: slowest scheme implementation around, even Emacs with we-don't-need-tail-call-optimization-in-functional-language Emacs doesn't want it
>hurd:imaginary kernel with decades of alleged development
>MySQL: on life support because of big userbase that doesn't want to give up on legacy software

GNU/Linux: everywhere/just werks
BSD:nope/nope

I really hope someone is paying the BSD shills, because you'd need to be unfathomably stupid to shill such utter garbage for free.

MPL license:
>hey you wanna use my code? sure thing bud, but if you roll out any bugfixes or enhancements to it, you just have to disclose your changes

BSD is more of a voluntaryist license. GPL isn't communist because no one is forcing you to use GPL'd software. GPL is voluntaryist, like all free software, but it comes with conditions. You agree to these conditions when you fork or otherwise create a derivative work.

What's so difficult to understand?

Sure, but make sure you understand what the license entails, and also be sure to never use shitty unenforceable meme licenses like WTFPL.

literally Hitler

MIT is the patrician's license

wrong.
bsd is anarchism in its purest form.

>GPL & BSD
>Commies
Microsoft EULA
>We Really don't give a shit about you just dont pirate

>copyright
>anarchism
Choose one.

>What's the point if all of these ended up being proprietary?
That you can buy them and benefit from them, and they have higher quality than FOSS due to economic incentive and capitalism. In FOSS all you have is:
>"me no liek how u do [trivial thing]"
>project forks and becomes half as successful and twice as expensive
>mature product never
And that would mean that sales would tank and new consoles would stop being developed because there's no profit. Are you fucking commies this stupid? You'd probably love living in Africa stupid shit eating nigger.

>>mature product never
Are you implying that Linux, Apache, GCC, ffmpeg etc never matured?

>That you can buy them and benefit from them
Please tell me more about how PS3-5 and XBox #whatever and IoT devices have benefitted you, kek.

>Are you implying that [the most non mature OS], [a thing that isn't even licensed under GPL], [a thing that Stallman got from a university and relicensed], and [a thing developed by Google and released] aren't perfect examples of the wonders of GPL in action.
How retarded are you?

>Linux
>non mature

>GCC
>unchanged since Stallman went to university in the 1970s

Grasping for straws I see.

>posted from my house where I probably own a TV, mobile devices, appliances, etc. In my city where infrastructure runs on BSD, even the public stuff like the train and the buses
Stupid commie

>GPL virgin
>BSD chad
We need one of those.

I don't own a TV, no, and keep your data mining """"internet of shit"""" to yourself.

Ironically, I am posting from macOS though, a proprietary and locked-down OS using components from FreeBSD for free.

Ignoring the inconvenient bits?
>unchanged since Stallman went to university in the 1970s
So you're saying that all the effective work on its development was done before it was even licensed as GPL? Then what does it prove? It proves that communism has rotten your brain.
>Linux is a mature OS
You're projecting really hard when you say I'm grasping at straws. How mature can it be if it doesn't even support the software that people actually need to work? GNU/Linux is a hobby thing at best.

>So you're saying that all the effective work on its development was done before it was even licensed as GPL? Then what does it prove? It proves that communism has rotten your brain.
No, GCC wasn't even invented until the late 80s you moron.

>How mature can it be if it doesn't even support the software that people actually need to work?
Linux dominates every single market except desktop computers. So yeah, you're grasping for straws.

>a thing that Stallman got from a university and relicensed
What? GCC was written from scratch, merely additional to the real triumph that a freely licensed compiler was released at all.
>Hoping to avoid the need to write the whole compiler myself, I obtained the
source code for the Pastel compiler, which was a multi-platform compiler
developed at Lawrence Livermore Lab. It supported, and was written in,
an extended version of Pascal, designed to be a system-programming
language. I added a C front end, and began porting it to the Motorola
68000 computer. But I had to give that up when I discovered that the
compiler needed many megabytes of stack space, and the available 68000
Unix system would only allow 64k.
>I then realized that the Pastel compiler functioned by parsing the entire
input file into a syntax tree, converting the whole syntax tree into a chain
of "instructions", and then generating the whole output file, without ever
freeing any storage. At this point, I concluded I would have to write a new
compiler from scratch. That new compiler is now known as GCC; none of the
Pastel compiler is used in it, but I managed to adapt and use the C front
end that I had written.
gcc.gnu.org/wiki/History

>I am benefiting from the BSD because it has created good products that improve my quality of living
>that's totally a bad think kekek
>le double irony commie man lelelelelele XD

>shitposting on Sup Forums
>benefitting from BSD

>>Anyone can just come along and expropriate your private property and there's nothing you can do about it.
Aside from not license it BSD. But others are free to do as they wish. No one is being coerced to do anything.

>linux dominates every single market... except the main market, the one that makes 80% of all the markets, basically the only one that matters
So mature, I see.

>Aside from not license it BSD
Only the original work retains the BSD license. Derivative work can be whatever, even a proprietary license.

>desktop computers is 80% of the computer market
Uh, no it in't sweetie.

It's funny how BSD fags have to literally attempt to distort actual history in order to make ludicrous claims about the success of BSD license compared to GPL.