Slashdot Mirror
PETA Creates New Animal-Friendly Software License
Anders writes "People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, the largest animal rights organization in the world, endorse a new FLOSS license. From the article: 'The Harm-Less Permissive License (HPL) is a permissive, non copyleft, software license. It is based on the FreeBSD license but with one additional restriction; the "harm-less" clause. It prevents software, licensed under the HPL, to be used for harming humans or animals.'" I guess this leaves the bunny-fueled power plant in Stockholm out in the cold.
I don't think PETA should be wading into the waters of making a new license - the mess they make in doing so is not worth the negligible benefit for the cause of animal welfare they're trying to serve.
If we had a time machine and could hop back in time to make initial versions of the GPL involve a broader cultural conscience, *maybe* this kind of thing would be appropriate, but it's too late now and adding another license that's likely to be incompatible with the GPL means that this is the license equivalent of "straight to videocasette".
For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
I'll be sure to "FLOSS" after eating my delicious manly steak tyvm.
We should start a new Slashdot and return control to the geeks. It actually wouldn't be that hard to get some users to
They seem to be aware of that:
"As great as we think this license is, it has a number of limitations and drawbacks: * It's incompatible with the Open Source Initiatives (OSI) definition of open-source software, since it does not comply with their 6th condition "No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor". * It is not considered "free software" according to the Free Software Foundation (FSF), since it does not comply with their requirement "The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0)". * It adds to the problematic proliferation of software licenses in the open-source community. * It is not compatible with any version of GPL. This is a major drawback, since it prevents the combination of HPL and GPL licensed software. Read a good argument for why software should comply with GPL in the article "Make Your Open Source Software GPL-Compatible. Or Else.".
I refuse to use software that's been tested on animals.
I've seen video from hidden cameras of researchers stuffing javascript into bunnies eyes and ears. It's horrific.
This space available.
I'm reminded of Asimov's 0th law of robotics, "A robot may not harm humanity or through inaction allow humanity to come to harm". Hunting deer, for instance, certainly harms the deer that are killed but in many areas the natural predators have been all but wiped out and not hunting would lead to massive overpopulation. Eventually causing much more harm to both the animals not being hunted and to the ecosystem in general.
So, what is 'harm'? Is a nuclear power plant harmful to humans or animals? Is a prison harmful to humans or helpful? How about a nuclear power plant? How about a video game that depicts the harming of humans or animals?
http://articles.sfgate.com/2005-06-23/opinion/17379611_1_peta-s-web-animal-cruelty-dead-animals
http://www.petakillsanimals.com/
http://www.newsweek.com/id/134549
and so on and so forth.
Fuck PETA. I feel my money and time would be better spent supporting the ASPCA. At least they don't make me want to cringe every time I hear or read about them.
I've pretty much reached the point where I equate PETA to Scientology. They're both a bunch of loonies with more money than sense.
"My God...it's full of trolls!"
You definitely love gobbling down Steve Ballmer's sausage.
If Steve Ballmer's sausage were grilled to a crisp and slathered in mustard, I'd eat it right in front of him.