alt Hacker News> Does not specify if it's vibe coded or not, which I think should be normal practice now
I am trying to say that when people freely share software with the world, I do not think you are entitled to try to add conditions. People are free to share whatever they like, in the conditions they like - in this case the MIT license. Everybody else is free to take the code AS IS.
There is a difference between a commercial transaction and software which is shared without any expectations in return. With software shared without any expectations in return. I don’t believe that we should be trying to create normal practices on top of existing licences or trying to specify under what conditions somebody can share something
> It's fine when someone cares about that kind of thing. And it's fine if they don't care, too. > We're allowed to like what we like. It's good to have options, and it's OK to prefer one way over another.
I agree and never said anything different, but if somebody wants to share under different conditions, then their conditions will always trump yours
Perhaps.
If it's free (libre) software, then it is shared freely. Others are free to take and use it. They can also change it; they don't have to accept it as it is. The existing code can be molded to be something different, or the ideas copied and used in some new implementation.
We're free to hype it up and become huge supporters. We're free to be critical and dismissive of of it. We're free talk about these things.
We're even free to leave the software where it is and walk away from it while bitching and moaning the entire time we do so.
People aren't beholden to the author, and the author isn't beholden to the end-user. We're all mutually free of those kinds of chains.
> Does not specify if it's vibe coded or not, which I think should be normal practice now
That's just a preferential statement wrapped up in a critical package. It could be stated with a greater abundance of tact, but it's no better nor worse than stating "Doesn't have a GPL-compatible license, which I think should be normal practice now".
(We're free to act tactlessly.)