open source licenses are meme

2 files changed, 35 insertions, 5 deletions

diff --git a/articles/code-of-conduct-does-more-harm-than-good.md b/articles/code-of-conduct-does-more-harm-than-good.md
index 436bd70..bcac9d3 100644
--- a/articles/code-of-conduct-does-more-harm-than-good.md
+++ b/articles/code-of-conduct-does-more-harm-than-good.md
@@ -1,21 +1,23 @@
 Code of conduct does more harm than good
 
-Code of conduct is a set of rules which gives an illusion of maintaining peace amongst the people of an community while introducing even bigger controversies and problems instead.
+Code of conduct is a set of rules which gives an illusion of maintaining peace amongst the people of a community while introducing even bigger controversies and problems instead.
 
 ### The Concept
-A code of conduct (or CoC) is a document that establishes expectations for behavior for a open source project’s participants. The idea of it that it can help create a positive social atmosphere for your community by enforcing upon unproductive attitudes from other participants can make you feel drained or unhappy about your work over time.
+A code of conduct (or CoC) is a document that establishes expectations for behavior of the open source project’s participants, a set of rules in simple words. A popular example of a CoC is of [Contributor Covenant](https://www.contributor-covenant.org/).
 
 ### The Big Problem
-Conceptually, CoCs are flawed as it misses the concept of person's beliefs. No person's mindset is equal, even if they are likeminded, they still would not always agree with each other. A CoC can be targetted explicitly at a certain people's beliefs which could be deemed as "problematic" while in reality, it really isn't. This causes the discrimination against them as their rights such as freedom of expression are now compromised, which in turn can cause major internal conflicts within the community even leading to a community split in the worst case scenario.
+The idea of it that it can help to create a positive social atmosphere for your community by enforcing upon "unproductive attitudes" from other participants can make you feel drained or unhappy about your work over time. This idea however, is dangerously flawed as it misses the concept of person's beliefs. No person's mindset is equal, even if they are likeminded, they still would not always agree with each other. A CoC can be targetted explicitly at a certain people's beliefs which could be deemed as "problematic" while in reality, that isn't really the case. This causes the discrimination against them as their rights such as freedom of expression are now compromised, which in turn can cause major internal conflicts within the community even leading to a community split in the worst case scenario.
 
-Unfortunately, CoC used in many open source projects does exactly what has been told above, it actively targets specific groups of people who are getting disadvantaged through these set of rules, just because their views and opinions aren't considered "ideal" by the project maintainers. This causes unnecessary conflicts within the community itself, while the unity weakens.
+Unfortunately, CoC used in many open source projects does exactly what has been told above, [it actively targets specific groups of people who are getting disadvantaged through these set of rules](https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941), just because their views and opinions aren't considered "ideal" by the project maintainers or even just by a contributor (Especially in extreme forms of CoC like in Contributor Covenant). Usually this happens by unnecessarily dragging their opinions outside of the project inside the projects responsibility. This causes unnecessary conflicts within the community itself, while the unity weakens. The more recent example which signified this issue as well is of [the generation of controversies during the introduction of CoC in Linux kernel development](https://itsfoss.com/linux-code-of-conduct/).
+
+It also introduces [unnecessary dramas](https://github.com/joyent/libuv/pull/1015) over very insignificant things, leading to useless arguments which leads absolutely nowhere.
 
 While introducing a document for enforcing rules for prohibiting on controversial views may seem like a good idea at first, however it can quickly mutate into containing rules which prohibits for even expressing normal beliefs, affecting you as well in the end.
 
 ### The Solution
 At the end, our views are different from one another. We may agree on something but disagree on other. Hence at the very least, we should just simply agree to disagree and walk away. It shouldn't matter if a person is a conservative or liberal, black or white, straight or gay, or anything in between, his or her skills shouldn't go to waste just because of the differences. We as a part of a community should be expected to have civil discussions without the requirement of unnecessary rules and regulations.
 
-Hence the concept of CoCs should be deprecated, or at the very least should have very little rules written like [No Code of Conduct.](https://nocodeofconduct.com/)
+Hence the concept of CoCs should be deprecated, or at the very least should have very little rules written [like so](https://nocodeofconduct.com/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md).
 
 (Happy new year btw.)
 
diff --git a/articles/open-source-licenses-literally-are-meme.md b/articles/open-source-licenses-literally-are-meme.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f42e1e0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/articles/open-source-licenses-literally-are-meme.md
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+Open source licenses literally are meme
+
+Open source licenses are terrible at actually keeping your software safeguard against the usage of it on proprietary softwares, which is the whole point of its existence.
+
+## The concept
+Open source licenses are licenses that comply with the Open Source Definition — in brief, they allow software to be freely used, modified, and shared. These licenses have set of "rules" that ranges from being truly free to use (aka permissive licenses) like MIT license or having copyleft ideologies, i.e., having safeguards to avoid the software being used in a proprietary fashion like GPL, the two most common types of open source licenses.
+
+## The issue
+An open source license may be an actual license through the (F)OSS respecting developer's eyes, however other see it as a paperweight instead. Hence, there would be a regular case of [the open source projects on proprietary softwares being sold commercially by tech corpos](https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/16/vizio_gpl_contract/), while the developers of those projects are getting barely any benefit to no benifit from it at all.
+
+## Permissive licenses are the absolute worst
+Permissive licenses may sound nice as a concept, (as these licenses give absolute freedom in its usage) in practise this would mean that your project would immediately get copied by the others while giving you very little to no credit at all, as there are 0 safeguards being promised against so. Hence, you can't even give a lawsuit to someone even if you wanted as they still didn't violate the license of your software.
+
+The meme below perfectly explains the state of these licenses:
+![bsd_meme](assets/images/bsd_meme.webp)
+
+## Copyleft licenses are barely any better
+At least copyleft licenses do have safeguards written on it which in theory, protects you against your software being used without your credit or even being used on a proprietary software. Going to the court for resolving the license violations however, is a different story. Though there *are* examples of [copyleft licenses being successfully enforced](https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech-industry/fortinet-settles-gpl-violation-suit/), these law cases aren't easy to win as majority of countries don't really take these licenses seriously and combining the fact that usually it is some giant tech corporation who violates these licenses, creates a very steep uphill battle to fight, due to the cost, effort and time required for these law cases, especially for a small (F)OSS community.
+
+There are still cases of companies [regularly violating the licenses](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/01/xiaomi-is-dragging-its-feet-on-the-gpl-again-this-time-with-the-mi-a1/) for a very long time even after a lot of complaints.
+
+## There is not a real soultion to this
+Looking through idealistic manner, one way to fix the copyleft licenses would be to simply make politicians to take these licenses more seriously. However since we are talking about politicians, that's very unlikely.
+
+So what's my solutions to this? Well, I would recommend to at least stick to copyleft licenses and avoiding permissive licenses all together, if you don't want to get screwed over by the tech corporations, or release your [software as a freeware](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware/) instead.
+
+;tags:software open-source rant
+;description:FOSS License: The God That Failed.