@inference @divVerent @thor RMS saw how the GPLv2 didn't fully protect FLOSS so this was the reason for the 3rd version. The GPLv3 seems like complete madness when taken out of context.

FLOSS is about freedom and ability to make changes. It is also an effort to allow for everyone to view the source code and see how it works.

The odd thing is that code used to be open in the early days of computing. This is partially how BSD Unix was able to be saved from being killed off. Computer companies made money on hardware. The shift to closed source and Intellectual Property was made gradually. Not much software was protected from being reused as a part of a closed source system.

The result is that open source code allowed for predatory entrepreneurs to become rich by legally stealing everything possible.

The truly stunning part is how none of the FSF licenses prohibit the sale of software or support. Proprietary software makes money from keeping knowledge hidden. A FLOSS business model favors the programmers as it pushes innovation and not legal sorcery as the way to be competitive.

The initiation of nuclear fission and fusion are common knowledge. Writing a program in a language one didn't develop on a system one didn't develop and compiled using the results of research that one had no part in is somehow able to be considered Intellectual Property. The result of being against the "FOSS cult" as a society has crippled Computer Science to the point where manufacturing is quickly approaching the limits of physics just to run code that hasn't had incentive to improve.

Have fun being rational and thinking for yourself. I will stay in the cult and repeat what I was brainwashed to say.