From f93ac4891927f4956f9ff70ca4cdaeacba608df9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Niels G. W. Serup" Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 16:38:01 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Did some cleaning up. --- site/about/index.org | 2 + site/about/niels.org | 3 +- site/writings/freeculture.org | 6 +-- site/writings/freesoftware.org | 8 +-- site/writings/hacking.org | 49 ++--------------- site/writings/licensing.org | 20 +++++-- site/writings/non-copylefted.org | 93 -------------------------------- 7 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 150 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 site/writings/non-copylefted.org diff --git a/site/about/index.org b/site/about/index.org index f00cf2b..213750a 100644 --- a/site/about/index.org +++ b/site/about/index.org @@ -89,3 +89,5 @@ depending on external JavaScript which depends on non-XHTML, like the FSF widget on the propaganda page, might cease to work). [[./links][Propaganda]] + +Should I go to HTML 5? I don't really care. diff --git a/site/about/niels.org b/site/about/niels.org index dbc0645..11b4622 100644 --- a/site/about/niels.org +++ b/site/about/niels.org @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ Niels goes by the nicknames "ngws" and "nqpz" (and a few others). ** Contact Niels can be contacted at [[mailto:ngws@metanohi.name][ngws@metanohi.name]]. You can also find him as ngws -in #hongabar on irc.freenode.net. +in #hongabar and #diku on irc.freenode.net. ** Things used by Niels @@ -128,6 +128,7 @@ Most of these I don't use. Some might be dead. + [[https://savannah.gnu.org/users/nqpz][GNU Savannah]] + [[http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/User:Schabeindividuum][Uncyclopedia]] (don't take this one seriously) + [[https://github.com/nqpz][GitHub]] (I don't like GitHub that much, but I use it sometimes) + + [[https://twitter.com/ngwwws][Twitter]] (not really using it) ** Keys diff --git a/site/writings/freeculture.org b/site/writings/freeculture.org index 3d46a7a..a5604ec 100644 --- a/site/writings/freeculture.org +++ b/site/writings/freeculture.org @@ -8,13 +8,11 @@ Free culture is about sharing and mixing creative works, often under [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft][copyleft]]. It encompasses pictures, video, audio, text and similar types of works. -It is good. +It is good, although not necessarily easy to produce. ** External links + [[http://freedomdefined.org/Definition][Definition of Free Cultural Works]] + [[http://freeculture.org/][freeculture.org]] -+ The [[http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/][Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike license]] --- a widely used - copyleft license approved for free cultural works. Wikipedia uses this - license. This website uses it as well in many places. ++ [[http://creativecommons.org/][Creative Commons]] diff --git a/site/writings/freesoftware.org b/site/writings/freesoftware.org index a6132f8..af3c998 100644 --- a/site/writings/freesoftware.org +++ b/site/writings/freesoftware.org @@ -67,10 +67,10 @@ programmers who do not use software that allows sharing and modification tend to do. Fourth, if a program cannot be studied, and if that program contains code for -reading from and writing to files in special formats --- e.g. the Microsoft -Word format --- people are forced to use that program if they have a file in -such a format (yes, OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice have good support for such -non-free formats, but not full support). +reading from and writing to files in special formats --- e.g. the Microsoft Word +format --- people are forced to use that program if they have a file in such a +format (yes, LibreOffice has good support for such non-free formats, but not +full support). Fifth, if a program cannot be studied, you cannot be certain of its intentions. Since you do not know what the program does (in details), you do diff --git a/site/writings/hacking.org b/site/writings/hacking.org index 6fbdd11..e65c619 100644 --- a/site/writings/hacking.org +++ b/site/writings/hacking.org @@ -1,49 +1,10 @@ #+title: Hacking -#+summary: A simple description of what hacking is really about +#&summary +Hackety hack. +#& +#+startup: showall #+license: wtfpl * Hacking -He's a *hacker*! Oh no, the pirate's going to *hack* our computer! And our mobile -phones! And our TV! Run for your lives! He'll use our credit cards to *hack* -even more! He might even *hack* our fridge! - -That's not a hacker. That's an evil person. Hackers are not evil. Hackers are -curious people. The evil person described above can be called a /cracker/ -instead. Such a person can be said to /crack/ computers and mobile phones, not -hack them. Hacking is very different. - -*Hacking* is the act of creating new ways to use objects with well-defined -uses. It's about experimenting, being clever, and playing. Hacking does not -have to result in something useful, though it sometimes does in the long -run. It's about the present. - -When you've hacked something, you've created a *hack*. It can happen -spontaneously, or it can happen because you want it to happen. - -Once, I was eating a pizza in a restaurant with a group of friends when one of -my friends couldn't eat anymore of his hummus. I had one slice of pizza back, -and he had a little hummus back. I realized then that I could /combine/ the -pizza and the hummus, and tada: I ate a hummus pizza slice (which was good, by -the way); i created a hack. - -Much more clever hacks have been created, but the hummus pizza example should -serve as a simple example of what a real-life hack /could/ be --- a hack can be -so many things. - -Hacking is often associated with software development, because that's often -about finding clever solutions and being open for new ways to do things. - -** "Just stop it already. You've lost." - -One could argue that the hacking community should just accept that the media -and the non-hacker part of the public have long ago changed the meaning of -hacker to "person who breaks digital security", and that hackers should just -find another word to describe themselves. But if we did that, all the history -associated with hacking would fade as new generations came along. - -** External links - -+ [[http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/H/hacker.html][The Jargon File: hacker]] -+ [[http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html][stallman.org: On Hacking]] - +I use the term "hacking" to mean "playing with". diff --git a/site/writings/licensing.org b/site/writings/licensing.org index d395fbe..f728bc0 100644 --- a/site/writings/licensing.org +++ b/site/writings/licensing.org @@ -5,8 +5,6 @@ What's up with all that stuff? #+startup: showall #+license: wtfpl -Previous opinion: <@eval macros.titlelink('/writings/non-copylefted')@>. - * Licensing on metanohi I usually just use the Do What The Fuck You Want To Public License, Version 2 @@ -45,7 +43,21 @@ I guess that some people consider e.g. CC BY-SA a recognizable symbol and that its law stuff is secondary. I can follow that thought, but I just got tired of it. -Some might not want to integrate WTFPL code into their project, but fuck them. +Some might not want to integrate WTFPL code into their project, but fuck them +(okay, in practice I'll probably just relicense to BSD2 or BSD3 if necessary). All that being said, I will work in any free software and free culture project -no matter what license they use. WTFPL is just for my junk. +no matter what license they use. WTFPL is just for my own junk. + + +* Copyright in general + +I'm not a fan of copyright as it is right now, but I don't know if it should be +removed alltogether (if that was even possible...). I think it would be nice if +copyright was only for commercial use. + + +* Previously + +I used to have a lot of text about this, but I've come to just not care. It's +all on git if you want to read it. diff --git a/site/writings/non-copylefted.org b/site/writings/non-copylefted.org deleted file mode 100644 index ef84517..0000000 --- a/site/writings/non-copylefted.org +++ /dev/null @@ -1,93 +0,0 @@ -#+title: My works, non-copylefted -#&summary -Why I don't use copyleft for my own works. -#& -#+startup: showall -#+license: wtfpl - -#&+classes=warning -This old opinion is somewhat verbose and, well, old. See <@eval -macros.titlelink('/writings/licensing')@> for my current opinion. Why do I -keep changing opinions? Ugh... -#& - -* My works, non-copylefted - -A few months ago, I went from using the GPL for most of my software to BSD3; -read about it [[/writings/software-licenses][here]]. I chose to continue to use Creative Commons -Attribution-ShareAlike for most of my non-software works. - -Now, I have chosen to stop copylefting my original works entirely. - -I do this not because of a change in my general view of copyleft, but because I -don't see myself ever using the legal benefits of copyleft; I can still -understand why someone would choose to use copyleft to challenge copyright, -fighting fire with fire, but it's just not something I would do. - -The power of copyright lies in whether people accept the terms that an author -puts forth, and that, if the copyright is abused, the author uses the law to -punish the abusers. The same is essentially true for copyleft. So, if I -release a work under e.g. Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike, and someone -derives a new work from that and does not copyleft that, I have the power to -make them change that decision; I could contact them and try to convince them to -be nice and free their work; I could contact them and say they *must* free the -work because of the law; and I could even /sue/ them for not freeing their work! - -Until now I have, without really realizing it, used copyleft licenses only for -the signal they send: If you create something new from something I have made -free, please make your work free as well. I never thought about what would -happen and what I would do if someone broke the law and didn't follow my -copyleft. I probably should have thought about that at the beginning, but hey, -I just wanted to make my works freely available and modifiable and hope that -others would do the same! - -While I don't think it is wrong to use even lawsuits for upholding copyleft, -it's not something I would /ever/ do. If someone takes a copylefted work and -abuses it, the community does not lose works; it simply does not gain them. -Arguing against this argument would be the same as asserting that Hollywood -loses money when people do not pay for digital, made-at-no-cost copies of their -films -- a view I certainly don't agree with. - -Of course, I might never have to enter a lawsuit to uphold copyleft. Maybe just -asking the abuser would be enough in all cases. But since this very page is -public, the abuser would realize that I don't intend to sue in any case, so they -might just ignore my request. And I don't intend to manipulate people into -making them think I would sue them. - -It's not my impression that there has been a lot of court cases involving -copyleft; most of the license violations seem to be handled without the need for -lawsuits, though I guess both lawyers and the threat of lawsuits are still quite -used. The FSF's [[https://www.fsf.org/licensing/compliance][Compliance Lab]] gives a good impression of the potential -difficulty of fixing license violations. I don't mind this compliance fixing, -but in principle I am a bit against spending time making evil people relicense -works when time could be spent making good people create new, free works. In -the long run, this will surely result in more good, free works, though forcing -someone evil to relicence might be practical in the short run. - -In essence: Copyright is so hopelessly broken, and personally I'm not going to -fight copyright with itself. This is because I'm not going to depend its and -copyleft's legal benefits, and that is because I would only depend on something -broken if I found it /very/ necessary and not just useful in the short run. I -just want to share my works freely, and if someone who uses my works don't want -to do that, I'll simply ignore them. My walking away from copyleft makes my -works usable by more people. - -#&img;url=/img/licenses/wtfpl.png,float=right - -So, from now on I'll use the [[http://www.wtfpl.net/][Do What The Fuck You Want To Public License (WTFPL)]] -for all my original works, software and culture alike. I don't think that the -"fuck" in the license is a problem. I also thought about using Creative Commons -Zero, but even though [[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC0_FAQ][it can be used for software]], [[http://opensource.org/licenses/index.html][OSI has not approved it]] -because of [[http://projects.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2012-February/thread.html][a patent clause]] ([[https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#CC0][FSF has approved it]], and it's also DFSG-free), so it -might be unpractical. WTFPL has been approved by the FSF. [[http://opensource.org/minutes20090304][OSI rejected it]], but -that's because they didn't consider it a license and not because they disagreed -with any of the (1) clauses in the WTFPL, so I don't think using the WTFPL will -pose any practical problems. I'll still contribute to copyleft works, though I -might mention this URL. - -I was a bit inspired by [[http://blog.ninapaley.com/2013/01/18/ahimsa-sita-sings-the-blues-now-cc-0-public-domain/][Nina Paley's change to CC 0 from CC BY-SA]]. I think her -story is scary. - -My first copylefted program to be un-copylefted is the generator for this -website which used to be under the AGPL. I'll relicense the rest of my works on -a need-to-basis (there are so many, and I have other stuff to do).