The European Commission sees open-source software as more than an IT tool. Policy makers are encouraging open-source ecosystems to drive innovation, autonomy and collaboration in a world where global trade is being redrawn.
This trade dispute highlights something most open-source advocates have known for years: open source is freedom. It’s freedom from monopolies, freedom from arbitrary pricing, and freedom from foreign influence.
Can I say that the issue is much deeper than just tariffs, and that Europe should not be using anything cloud or AI based? Ideally not even from EU if not fully open-source or open-data.
But… This is a good thing. I will take it. More FOSS awareness is great news. As long as it sticks.
Good.
SEE!!! Trump is doing some good! It’s about time the power was taken from these arrogant, invasive, Silicon Valley companies.
Here comes Europe, Fuck Yeah. Here to save the motherfucking day yeah.
Several EU countries already have fascists or borderline fascists in the government (Italy, the Netherlands, Hungary) or have a raising fascist force grabbing for power (e.g. Germany, Sweden).
Don’t expect too much from the EU. We might very well overtake you on the road to open fascist total control.
Freude, schöner Götterfunken!
(Joy, thou shining spark of God)
Tochter aus Elyyyysium
I strongly support the tariffs but if this gets more people to use software that respects their freedom, then hey, that’s even better.
Are you Russian?
I mean, I have to assume they meant “oppose” and just mistyped.
Something like sixth or seventh generation American. How dare I desire a setup where other nations exploit us less?!
I get what the founders were talking about now. A lot of people really shouldn’t be able to vote if you want a functioning society. They just chose the wrong metric.
If you run a market and take a cut of every sale, you will make infinitely more profit than selling items yourself. This is exactly the position the U.S. was in - which is why it became the richest country in human history.
You also argue that the U.S. is getting “exploited” because they aren’t the ones doing the selling. But who cares? I’ll tell you who, people who don’t know wtf they are talking about.
In your infinite wisdom, the better choice is saddling yourself with more risk and less rewards because “the vibe” feels better.
A trade deficit is never exploitation. Lets pretend it is!
All of the stats Trump put up weren’t tariffs, they were a percentage of much less they would have to import in Goods from a certain country to make for the trade deficit with said country in Goods.
Not a single stat on that sheet looked at the trade in services. America always had a service trade surplus.
If we combine the two, a lot of countries that seem to “”““exploit””" the US are suddenly exploited by the US.
But lets go even further: The countries receiving the highest tariffs are Vietnam and Lesotho, becuase the US has the highest deficit in Goods with these countries. Because both countries are too fucking poor to buy american products. A worker in Lesotho, producing Jeans for the US market, would have to invest three months wages to buy said jeans and about 20 years of wagest to buy the cheapest american import car. How the fuck should these countries reduce their deficit?
Okay, but still, we assume that a deficit is somehow exploitation. Trump has said that the tariffs are going to do two things, namely bringing back American Industry and forcing trade partner to drop “barriers and tariffs” (i.e. safety regulations).
For a tariff to do the former, it has to stay until the relevant factories have been built in America and have also paid themselves off. For a tariff to the latter, the possibility of it being removed once the partner comploes has to be on the table. A tariff can’t do both.
But hey, don’t believe me. Read the paper the White House cited in their Announcement of the Tariffs.
deleted by creator
Free trade isn’t exploitation.
In fact tariffs are just costing you more.
There is zero chance the USA will have anything to replace the amount you import in the term trump serves let alone a decade from now.
The USA will never compete with child slave labour in China and Mexico etc either.
This is what we’re dealing with here in the States, folks.
Gawd help us.
Welcome to Lemmy. It sounds like you either come from a place of extreme privilege or you’re not actually sure how the tariffs will affect the people.
The idea behind the tariffs is fine. They want to drive union Members (fun fact, did you know that that’s how the founding fathers referred to citizens?) to buy and trade locally. However, many of the products we use in our day to day life come from industries that don’t exist in the US yet, and it will take years to create the required infrastructure and factories and farm land in order to create those industries.
Effectively, the tariffs would have been fine. If the US had actually been prepared to take care of itself. But it’s not, and it won’t be for a long time. So, the tariffs only exist as an extra tax right now.
Exploit the US less? How is the US being exploited exactly?
Just noticed insane typos in the original comment, wow. Serves me right for using voice-to-text without proofreading.
*Serves you right for using your brain without proof-thinking.
Lemmy seems to be anti-AI, at least from my impression, but I am hopeful that AI will help invigorate the open source software world. If people can code better, faster, cheaper, safer (more secure) that will surely apply to open source as well. AI coding tools could bring on the Linux mainstream revolution. Imagine thousands of autonomous agents refining software for Linux. There could be a glut of driver support, apps coming to Linux, and so much more. I am hopeful about it.
If people can code better, faster, cheaper, safer (more secure) that will surely apply to open source as well.
I’m not European, but I understand that there’s an old European (German?) saying that basically goes: “If I had wheels, I’d be a trolley.” I understand that it’s been pretty well-established that AI coding tools routinely underperform compare to humans in terms of “better” and “safer”, which indirectly would also lead to it failing at “cheaper” too.
On top of that, there is another major issue with using AI for open-source code: copyright. First, you don’t know if the code that you’re adding through AI may be copying license-incompatible code verbatim. Because everyone has access to open-source code, it would be trivial for anyone to search and find copyright-infringing code to attack projects with. Second, the code that AI produces is also not-copyrightable, so that is another line of attack that this would make open-source projects vulnerable to. These could be used in combination as a one-two punch combination to knock out an open-source project.
I think that using AI-generated code in open-source projects is a uniquely ill-advised idea.
I won’t hold my breath on it.
Up until this minute, AI has produced plentiful examples of how it can produce anything but good code.
I’d rather have a developer writing software, slowly, because they have an intelectual itch and want to try and see the outcome of their idea than the proverbial army of monkeys furiously typing away.
The other problem is unlike stack overflow, a helpful answer by an AI isn’t visible and indexed therefore someone else has to do another prompt for the potential answer.
It’s pretty useful replacing stack overflow that could also generate code specific to your project. It’s also useful for testing. Like any tool, it has its use cases.
I sometimes float the idea in my brain to learn how to code. If I ever come to it, I want to debate and discuss my work with another human. Not a machine.
Personal preference.
That’s a great way to do it, but human attention on your code is a scarce and valuable resource. LLMs are great for the sort of lazy stupid questions where you benefit from a quick answer, but also don’t want to waste someone else’s time on. When you are learning nearly all the questions you’ll have will be like this, your progress is gated on finding the answers, and even if you are taking a class and it’s someone’s job to look at your code and help you understand what’s wrong with it, you have to wait your turn for that and only get so much help.
Unless they switch to running BSD, it’s all crap.
The isc/bsd2 license does not protect the user
You’re not a tech person, you’re an ideologue, so you wouldn’t understand the culture around ISC. If a company wants security, constancy, and longecity, BSD is the only thing to use.
Choosing between Windows and BSD, which would you prefer everybody use? There are companies that already banned GPL software from company computers, what should they use?
Look, im not even going to respond the first part. I love the bsd’s as well, from a technical standpoint. From a licensing standpoint, not so much (i see the value in a short license, though).
Im not concerned by what these companies use or do not use. Im concerned about protecting my, and other ‘common good’ software with a license that strictly prohibits user exploatation. The GPL does this perfectly.
GPL is evil. GPL is poison. You’re an ideologie. You are vapid of the original UNIX cultural mindset. It’s all mushy feelings you care about, not best tools to accomplish the work. You have no experience how to setup a BSD desktop. If you had a job as network gateway admin for employee network services, your argument would sound very different. You might as well as well say GPL fills my heart with so much love, I wish I could make passionate love to the GPL"
GPL is evil. GPL is poison. You’re an ideologie.
🤣 Do you hear yourself? No one’s going to say something as hyperbolic and emotional as “GPL is evil. GPL is poison.” except an anti-GPL ideologue. The “original UNIX cultural mindset” is itself an ideology. You are an ideologue. You might as well as well say, “BSD license fills my heart with so much love, I wish I could make passionate love to the BSD license.”
My brother in christ, unix was all rights reserved. There was a non-compete agreement prohibiting at&t from selling their OS, hence why it was more or less given to universities. Later, the BSD’s did a theseus ship, and at&t still tried to claim ownership through legal methods. For them, the license symbolizes this independence from at&t, which is why it doesnt lay claims on user protection.
https://m.slashdot.org/story/336593
https://www.hardenedbsd.org/~shawn/DEFCON-25-Ilja-van-Sprundel-BSD-Kern-Vulns.pdf
I doubt it changed much and it sounds logical too.
I don’t know what you are saying. Can I assume that you have never touched BSD, know nothing about how it functions?
Which one?
To make it easier and more flexible, I would suggest FreeBSD on desktop and servers. For routers or firewall, there’s nothing else but OpenBSD.
