I haven’t used Illustrator, what does the shape tool do that makes it different to using boolean operations on shapes?

https://inkscape-manuals.readthedocs.io/en/latest/circles-ellipses-and-arcs.html

No, that’s not my argument. Plenty of those licenses are enforceable and sometimes enforced - even if they’re not enforced perfectly.

My argument is that OP’s license is mostly targeting situations which, I believe, are unenforceable. I know this following example is ridiculous, but it’s a bit like saying “we should ban drunk driving in other countries”. Drunk driving laws are useful, they’re enforceable even if not perfect, but there’s no point in trying to enforce them in other countries who won’t respect our laws.

The reason we aren’t enforcing what OP is proposing is because it doesn’t exist, so no enforcement apparatus exists. Why would it?

Our legal systems already recognize and have some mechanisms to enforce contracts and licenses. We don’t need to build a whole new one for each license. But our existing copyright system already fails to enforce itself in certain countries and with certain entities (e.g. military) and I just can’t see that changing.

Why?

I absolutely agree. Violent direct actions are rarely the preferred route even of notorious groups like antifascists. Even (left) radical groups usually understand and teach that mass movements are safer and more powerful, the best way to win a battle is without firing a shot. And the failure of the late 1800s/early1900s anarchist propaganda of the deed assassinations proves your point that violence alone won’t solve problems. My caveat is that when violence becomes tactically appropriate, we shouldn’t assume it’s inherently wrong.

Do you guys think that this is utopic? Does it really hurt the essence of open source? Do you think in the same way about this, and if yes, how do you cope with that?

I do think it’s utopian and I can’t see it being effective, but you do raise a good question: “Does it really hurt the essence of open source?”

I see open source through a pragmatic lens, not some untouchable liberalist moral right. I’m not the kind of person who says “We should hand power over to the fascists since they did win the vote this time”, or “Nazis have a legal right to be here, stop harassing them!”. Helping people in reality is more important than trying to implement abstract ideals consistently. So, when push comes to shove, I don’t really care about the essence of open source. One could claim that copyleft (e.g. GPL, CC-SA) violates the liberty of companies to use code freely. Yes, it does violate their liberties, but that’s a good thing. That’s the whole point, in fact. It’s a pragmatic compromise away from some abstract ultimate freedom, making it something that actually empowers us and avoids helping those exploiting us as much. And you’ve taken a similar theme - while I disagree with some of the entities you’ve chosen, I agree with your attitude. The essence of open source isn’t real, it can’t help us.

I don’t think it’s useful to directly compare the GPL. It’s often disrespected, yes, but it’s also often enforceable. If you violate the GPL in a for-profit product, you might be someone the courts have jurisdiction over and the license is enforceable. It is sometimes enforceable and therefore useful. In OP’s proposal, the only target of it I see as viable is the “radical parties”. All those other targets are pretty out-of-reach.

As a side point, GPL, along with MIT, CC0, WTFPL, etc., would still be somewhat useful regardless because they forfeit rights. I can modify and republish the software publicly because I’m confident I can’t legally be sued for it.

Good points. In fact, many of the normalized things we take for granted today (like the eight-hour day, liberations of many colonies) were gained through the efforts of radical parties and radical, including violent, actions.

The status quo causes immense suffering. There’s a trolley problem at play - to do nothing is to be complicit in suffering. Radical opinions are needed to break with the status quo to reduce suffering, even if it involves direct action against the people running the system.

We have all kinds of other licenses that people disrespect, yet we have them and try to enforce them where we can. I don’t seewhy this would be any different, even if it’s a very difficult challenge.

Laws mean nothing as ideals, like you said, they need enforcement. Unless we engage in vigilante action, we rely on existing law enforcement systems, which do have biases and vested interests and therefore an incentive to ignore many of these criteria. Drunk driving is a case where most governments can look at it and see the obvious benefit to society and its rule, and will bother to at least try to enforce it. And LEA have resources that enable them to enforce that. This kind of license, on the other hand, doesn’t have that same motivation nor capability. Who’s going to stop a military using it? Their own government? Another government?

It’s completely utopian.

I remember a thread where someone had put a mining rig inside a hotel or apartment’s cleaning room and was running it off the stolen electricity.

One of my sites was close to being DoS’d by openAI’s crawler along with a couple of other crawlers. Blocking them made the site much faster.

I’d admit the software design offering search suggestions as HTML links didn’t exactly help (this is a FOSS software used for hundreds of sites, and this issue likely applies to similar sites) but their rapid speed of requests turned this from pointless queries into a negligent security threat.

Sure, that’s technically true, but I think it’s acceptable for this infographic’s purpose.

• I don’t believe a US company profits from someone using LibreWolf (unless you want to count volunteer labor if someone upstreams their contributions, which doesn’t apply to most of the target audience)
• As you said, any other usable browser is going to be based on Chrome, FF or Apple tools. So what should it say? Nothing? Even if it’s not perfect, I believe LibreWolf is a far better suggestion than just leaving them with a default choice like Chrome or Edge, or something unusable on sites they want to use.

why not just Linux?

Choice paralysis is a real obstacle for casual users who don’t have specific needs (e.g. anti-proprietary values) and don’t want to know what a kernel or a binary blob is, we’ve even seen this with Lemmy and other Fediverse options. So giving a specific distro suggestion is effective for this, and then later enabling them to move to other distros if there’s one more suited to them.

Linux Mint is generally well-received by beginner users, especially those moving from Windows which is similar enough to Cinnamon. Even if it’s not the ideal distro, it’s one which I believe casual users are less likely to reject. Hardware is more likely to ‘just work’, including graphics cards and non-free codecs. Non-free software readily appears in the app store, which is important if users are still dependent on them (e.g. their hobby group only uses Discord). While I personally believe in, support and create FOSS software, I don’t see how FSF-endorsement is important to the target audience, and if it risks them complaining that their NVIDIA GPU is acting weird or they’re having trouble installing proprietary tools they need for work, then I’d compromise and give them the smoothest reasonably-free option possible and allow them to decide to move to another distro later when they’re more familiar with Linux and how easy it is to try out distros.

People are saying it is Bad News

So, uhh, you want to tell us who is saying it’s bad news?

The other answers are right, just explaining in simpler language in case anyone needs it:

Codeberg, like Gitlab and Github, is a site for hosting and managing code repositories. These make it easy for many people to collaborate on a software project, review code, keep track of changes and history, keep track of bugs and feature requests, and more.

Here’s an example of a (very active) code project to explore: https://codeberg.org/tenacityteam/tenacity (An audio editor based on Audacity)

The most famous code repo management tool, GitHub, was bought by Microsoft a few years ago, so reliable community-run alternatives like Codeberg are increasingly important.

Anyone who doesn’t know how to (safely!) pirate books, articles, films, games and software, please read, use and share the resources over at !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

This skill is increasingly useful.

Maybe I’m getting alright at in-code documentation because when my code breaks after months of me not looking at it, I can return and get up to speed in a few minutes.

(or maybe these people are working on much more advanced stuff)

I still use Invidious and Piped for searches and looking at comments, but they are currently broken (as far as I’ve seen).

I’m glad you mentioned the open infrastructure projects. For example, I use some of the few remaining nitter/invidious/etc. servers.

As for free software projects I suggest donating your time with contributions.

Definitely. I’m already spending much of my spare time doing this.