Slashdot Mirror
Open Source Devs Reverse Decision to Block ICE Contractors From Using Software (vice.com)
An anonymous reader quotes Motherboard:
Less than 24 hours after a software developer revoked access to Lerna, a popular open-source software management program, for any organization that contracted with U.S. immigrations and Customs Enforcement, access has been restored for any organization that wishes to use it and the developer has been removed from the project... The modified version specifically banned 16 organizations, including Microsoft, Palantir, Amazon, Northeastern University, Johns Hopkins University, Dell, Xerox, LinkedIn, and UPS... Although open-source developer Jamie Kyle acknowledged that it's "part of the deal" that anyone "can use open source for evil," he told me he couldn't stand to see the software he helped develop get used by companies contracting with ICE.
Kyle's modification of Lerna's license was originally assented to by other lead developers on the project, but the decision polarized the open-source community. Some applauded his principled stand against ICE's human rights violations, while others condemned his violation of the spirit of open-source software. Eric Raymond, the founder of the Open Source Initiative and one of the authors of the standard-bearing Open Source Definition, said Kyle's decision violated the fifth clause of the definition, which prohibits discrimination against people or groups. "Lerna has defected from the open-source community and should be shunned by anyone who values the health of that community," Raymond wrote in a blog post on his website.
The core contributor who eventually removed Kyle also apologized for Kyle's licensing change, calling it a "rash decision" (which was also "unenforceable.")
Eric Raymond had called the decision "destructive of one of the deep norms that keeps the open source community functional -- keeping politics separated from our work."
Kyle's modification of Lerna's license was originally assented to by other lead developers on the project, but the decision polarized the open-source community. Some applauded his principled stand against ICE's human rights violations, while others condemned his violation of the spirit of open-source software. Eric Raymond, the founder of the Open Source Initiative and one of the authors of the standard-bearing Open Source Definition, said Kyle's decision violated the fifth clause of the definition, which prohibits discrimination against people or groups. "Lerna has defected from the open-source community and should be shunned by anyone who values the health of that community," Raymond wrote in a blog post on his website.
The core contributor who eventually removed Kyle also apologized for Kyle's licensing change, calling it a "rash decision" (which was also "unenforceable.")
Eric Raymond had called the decision "destructive of one of the deep norms that keeps the open source community functional -- keeping politics separated from our work."
The same guy made a huge drama when Microsoft bought GitHub:
https://twitter.com/jamiebuild...
https://github.com/Microsoft/w...
Computing was available. IBM sold tabulation machines and rented technicians to run them to the SS for use in the concentration camps.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
Should politics be separated from our work? I'm not convinced it should be. The whole idea of open source / free software is political in nature as it is a means to keep power and control of a users computing with them and not in the hands of any outside entity such as a corporation or government.
I think it's a good idea to keep them separated. The problem with your movement or organization taking a political stance is partisans start fighting back. Just look what's happened to science, AGW has big political implications and the moment it was embraced by "one side" the other side basically became an anti-science political movement. If Open Source gets rebranded as a left wing political philosophy you're going to start seeing legislation targeted at stopping those Libera^H^H^H Open Source people from writing code that controls important infrastructure.
The other big issue is that the Open Source community doesn't necessarily agree on politics outside of the idea of Open Source, and the Open Source community by it's nature tends to take political philosophy a bit more seriously than most. So branding community as a left-wing thing could really split the community. And you don't really want to get into discussions on whether to ban ICE while allowing the Chinese government.
So let's take this to the extreme: If computing and Linux were around in WW2, should we have let Hitler use Linux? What if Hitler's use of Linux was the deciding factor in NAZI Germany winning the war?
Ignoring the question of how you could stop him from using Linux...
Yes. I'm willing to sacrifice many of my principles to fight NAZIs.
I stole this Sig
Eric was not one of the original authors of the Open Source Definition. His memory is imperfect, I doubt deliberately, we're just old. The OSD was created about 9 months before the founding of OSI as the Debian Free Software Guidelines. Eric wasn't a Debian developer. The only change upon forming OSI was the name of the document. Later on, OSD #10 was added (which IMO was not necessary as it's implied by OSD#6).
Also, Eric's call for shunning is a bit over the top. Just get with the values of Open Source and move on, or be very careful to call your non-Open-Source paradigm something other than Open Source.
Nor does it seem necessary to have expelled a developer, if he wished to remain with the project after the removal of an ill-thought-out license term. We can preserve the ethos without being draconian.
Bruce Perens.
It's because you're buying into the strawman argument about the D's wanting to have totally open borders. That's not anywhere near the policy Obama had, and not the policy Democrats in office or their voters want. What should be common sense is to treat immigrants and refugees humanely regardless of whether or not they are ultimately allowed entry.
No. It's cancer.
Kyle wasn't thrown under a bus.
He tried to make a major change to the licensing of software that wasn't entirely his own.
He was smacked for it. End of story.
Kyle's still free to fork "My Shitty, Politically Vindictive Learna Offshoot".
He's simply not being allowed to do it for the primary project.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
There is no human right to go to the United States. That is a privilege we may chose to offer or not. This has nothing to do with morality.
If the US was directly responsible for the horrible conditions others find themselves in then you might have an argument on morality grounds. But otherwise, no non-US citizens have a right to come to the United States or any other nation for that matter.
CAPTCHA: patriot (not kidding)