Follow

@t0k

Basically .

As you said, does whatever it can to build ecosystems that depends on it, technically and culturally.

They did so in 2010 with through . It did so with . And . And .

has several limits (that I tried to address with the ) but the strongest the the better.

Sticking with and resisting to Google's pressure won't save your ecosystem alone.

BUT it might make their capture weaker and their abuse of their dominant position more evident.

As for AGPLv3 be harder to use, that's plain bullshit. As long as they use your software unmodified, they do not even need to host a copy of the code. They just need to provide users a link to your repository.

It's pretty easy.
But they do not want to.

In the long run, an AGPL alternative out of Google's control might enable the creation of an alternative ecosystem, and they want to minimize this risk as much as they can.

Without looking evil, obviously.

But if you look at Google from outside the USA, it's slowly becoming a huge geopolitical liability.

Europe is realizing that depending on means becoming an US colony.

And alternatives like your might get much more support from here.

So my suggestion is to ignore the FUD and resist Google.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves. A STEM-oriented instance.

An inclusive free speech instance.
All cultures and opinions welcome.
Explicit hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.
We federate with all servers: we don't block any servers.