Can copyleft force corporation to donate?

MIT and BSD are pretty much the same terms, not sure how you end up putting them in different categories here.

Copyleft isn’t forcing anyone to do anything nor is it a “virus”, “cancer” or any other MS/Ballmer BS like that. You have the choice of either using or not using someone else’s software under their licensing terms. A change from something like MIT late enough in a project’s life could cause forking to happen though.

Copyleft could help some companies decide they can contribute by ensuring everyone plays fair but of course it won’t magically make the software any more useful so there has to be a compelling use case for any would-be contributors in the first place.


I don’t know thati view populism as a derogatory political association, but I’m not entirely sure that I would put those men in that camp.

As far as autonomy, you’re in a place where autonomy requires privacy and individuality, something the conformists in their collectivism aren’t willing to tolerate.

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
George Orwell, 1984”

We are here , our public spaces are entirely captured by crony authoritarianism across the western hemisphere.

I suspect that’s why so many users have hope for Hiaku, as in it is not yet captured.

it is what i always said.

so, how to break the circle?

bless to the God for more saints?

1 Like

I’d say attract universities attention so they see Haiku as a platform to teach development. Perhaps one would start a software project. A good example of successful project is VLC; it has bring some devs to linux, and visibility the uni. But this implies that documentation and tools are up to the task…

1 Like

Haiku has been in universities for 15 + yrs yet no traction. Auckland Uni, and I know it’s been used by US uni teachers in comp sci, still no traction.

Universities are dominated by alumni and government directives that are funded. Haiku doesn’t suit the aims those groups have.

I’d bet, if you had a Dev willing to make the entire 3d stack work top to bottom, you could raise 200k usd for that project. I’m not inclined to fund undirected noodling,

I’ll commit $500 towards that right now, and I’m not even a gamer. It is however the most frequent pain point people bring up. AMD ca4ds are the closest to functional afaik but maybe intel arc would be more feasible ??

specifically targeting user priorities is how the fund raising could become successful

1 Like

No idea how you got to the number of $200k, but it looks like we won’t find out, because apparently nobody cares enough about a 3d stack to organize the funding. Which I imagine is a taxing and very divers job. You need to design the funding campagne, have a trustworthy handler of all that money, need someone to find and oversee the developers doing the actual work. Plus probably a dozen more things I’d never think of.
Obviously not a walk in the park there isn’t even a failed attempt yet…


3 posts were split to a new topic: Roadmaps and R1

No, fiat currency is currency not backed by a limited commodity. The US Dollar, for example, is not backed by gold or any other limited commodity, and as such, they can print as much as they want.

1 Like

This is a functional truth of all currencys. There’s always a cost in debasing currency. Crypto trys to solve this in a novel energy intensive way. This is not the way.

It’s a hypothetical conversation, i actually think if they’re were devs both capable and trustworthy, the community would rally behind fixed goals. The broader point i was making that you obviously glossed over

Is that an insult to the current developers being either incapable or untrustworthy?

This is turning into a flame-fest. To answer the question in the original posted title: No. Copyleft cannot force corporations to donate.


How is it not the way? Also certain currencies can’t be debased, like Bitcoin, for example, which is a deflationary currency, meaning there’s a cap to the total number of them that can be minted ever, and once they’ve all been minted, the number of bitcoin will eventually dwindle, keeping its value up.

I see.
open source is sorts of morality thing, not economic thing.
it is the fate.
most of open source are toys.
only some lucky one can be useful and famous enough .
because open source have no such power to handle corporation.

It solves issues with cross-architecture and some cross-os problems in addition to the obvious black-box problems with closed-source. Bytecodes solve some of the problems with closed-source code but not all.

1 Like

it is morality thing which users care about, not corporation.
open source be existence with the morality reason.
but close-source still be the major of the world with economic reason.

so, i ask again and again.
is there any other way to bring money for open source?
except morality donation.
the answer is no.
maybe one day, people don’t need to work for money with life.
then, open source will be the major of the world.

Well, if you have questions about open source or free software there´s lots of resources available on the internet for you to read, without us having to repeat it here.
I´d start with Open-source software - Wikipedia (from a more or less neutral point of view) and Philosophy of the GNU Project - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation (from a GNU point of view). I chose the links to the english version, but maybe there are also translations to your native language.

Hope that helps at least a bit to explain how open source software works (or is supposed to work)

1 Like

there are about more than 600 kinds of open source system in
but, only several of them are popular.
most of them are hobby.
even their forums are dead.

this is the circle of open source.
only several one have luck to break the circle with saint’s power.
i know what is open source and how it work.
it is good.
but not good enough to be the major of the world.

What about offering something that would the businesses find interesting to make them fund the project? I’m not talking about working for the company, but working in certain features that companies could want or need.

Another option could be finding funds in the public sector, or education.

1 Like

it is hard to do.
well, you can see the situation.

some programmers want to work for fun, not only money.
some users are tired with the black-close-software.
corporation want some new way to innovate or catch up.

so, open source flash out with copyleft and morality donation.

the biggest bug of open source, it is hard to get the programmer’s goal with only morality donation.

if these programmers have stable income, the open source project will grow up ( even slowly).
if these programners be unemployed, the open source project will frozen down.

so, is your solution way keeping programmers with funny status?
it is the key.