From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:5f26::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms8.migadu.com with LMTPS id Hm6YFATPlWWtoQAAkFu2QA (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 22:17:56 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:58f0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0.migadu.com with LMTPS id yHxwDgTPlWWhQgAAqHPOHw (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 22:17:56 +0100 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=koszko.org header.s=mail header.b=o3jVbx3R; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1704316676; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=kOnVg/YJ7uxy3sz+bjKQEYkMn3osDeCHyxY+E6Ec1LQ=; b=r/YTUjoIW/kOViLQj83bQZsxq494QijWofWAtnlAy96XfLPVEJOGsLmWeFuv4xdIWHhnPh j4s0BhFO9KXYvKbSQho8RdZV2z2xk9Tajz+6WNIOg7J4Lz9737J7dI1RzAYg3KxFWlyxCY SVygkgmB6ERUiHq1sA+HIv1w9lSZtAg+LJ5vO8QB0WlVE6WzXl4jLR6jK9kE9uEWQnfZu8 vDxyjXYFwVlHONsmxU5d3GwgrI79lLyPBSM4LQhls2IIx4NkxyaVicaMBWHHjgSyMdAw8/ KT/Z/+UCpF37aXfOgfqDtkZ91SHIR11hWQi8718sK+p0hU9vJ9vyEH0REKtEUw== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1704316676; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=L8rtTd2O8oCudkZpq3g/WyJgxdtWrmTxaoaqJga7EEF0z/QvrmtIwplMZ3Hr+pFuJoyEsx 6dS5QmWsKk6pYIZi4pJsLXUraJoeMZSa8okbcLTO21o+OR9MBGKeR+AmYQbvO7rJlP5z8l nkJJ2rKzg0u9Y4c3JmXeJUTpOtsSNy89l59BabxkqYvD32iiysPz5bNVK45OKKAxqI2Gcm XDmfMVxK0H6lqp9CtmJoXRTlhPp/sPrFp6I0EzKD03NjZcLe3eVQ0uWmqDMJlzSWASHJX0 nOYK6rSp8vpXTDfWuuUFVvSISDxZWX0226ZJmUbBl1rY4pjb1EchFUS0dNEn9A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=koszko.org header.s=mail header.b=o3jVbx3R; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA3D25CB5C for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 22:17:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rL8bv-0005ma-PR; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 16:17:11 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rL8bt-0005mP-5A for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 16:17:09 -0500 Received: from koszko.org ([93.95.227.159]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rL8bp-0002Cx-Td for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 16:17:08 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=koszko.org; s=mail; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject :Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=kOnVg/YJ7uxy3sz+bjKQEYkMn3osDeCHyxY+E6Ec1LQ=; b=o3jVbx3RGKV35U7U9lRmnogoJn EOKiI9GqeBNXWQCn45S4JlNBpMKPZF682x7kj3w9o5uJo8sCaVjpV4O7nr8t1pOJi0OwPwf5TNRwv CnjHgensmD1KRMVXIT9OoCWsrJuBxC6k80bvtnh/P+njdy4PzOgxZ94BYTmmP6VhIu7JjBp9FScZ7 xOzTWzWjLqVKq0k0kAeeuilZSV7/o88w6/hBG0BOUhtRDGEmUede1gR1FZzb52Vdq63o0HmFX7bQQ ve7a593ud6wCyjVskjR0/++p+pCd5+q5qr4N8hAqw/JrjWw+VrDwo82IUGcvcoB2/m+KdakAOAYrs tdB3WKXxCquFXc/ffQgA76ukeMuTAh1ewP33NNhr1grVwkqR+5pQhxSDqpKKf1JKeQau1Ewef/hJC EIorDIY8eUo8zpve3BrPOXW2hYDU3r6rNT89d3fVafjnrhFoq/X3BE4Z4WsLxJ+2JvI1ih/LUJ3Jo yCM2MnK75aaG4uHKRuGSL5KX8pKRjdDuHqmpqqIzd+xKZGZk45mXGavP5JGIz3gNJZjtGUzbCQQW7 bfgXGeLVh8uVzAXW+AJ2d+c4CMAM2IMx910WYPb6aeVAgEz6srWHflu2cTwQZqRB6baH4qpud/9OL pM7r9+sE5FJdRcPBx08K3ZTP6s6yGtERCr4PtDKWw=; Received: from 78-11-235-71.static.ip.netia.com.pl ([78.11.235.71] helo=localhost) by koszko.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96.1) (envelope-from ) id 1rL8bn-00037u-0R; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 22:17:03 +0100 Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2024 22:17:01 +0100 To: Alexandre Oliva Cc: "Wojtek Kosior via \"Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.\"" , Liliana Marie Prikler , Felix Lechner Subject: Re: Mixing GPL and non-copyleft code in source files Message-ID: <20240103221701.6921e451.koszko@koszko.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20231222175325.5e611342.koszko@koszko.org> <87zfy2nmm7.fsf@lease-up.com> <20231222220620.35150150.koszko@koszko.org> <87tto9oo6q.fsf@lease-up.com> <20231223191905.168b3fad.koszko@koszko.org> <20231227102247.45350dd4.koszko@koszko.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.1.1 (GTK 3.24.37; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/wXP8llxbtzOViqTC+k0XhTL"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=93.95.227.159; envelope-from=koszko@koszko.org; helo=koszko.org X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-to: Wojtek Kosior From: Wojtek Kosior via "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -7.37 X-Spam-Score: -7.37 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: BA3D25CB5C X-Migadu-Scanner: mx11.migadu.com X-TUID: tUNmn0UZ09P5 --Sig_/wXP8llxbtzOViqTC+k0XhTL Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Alexandre and thank your for your response! > When facing a situation of abuse, of violence, it may be morally > defensible for someone to turn a blind eye and allow it to proceed. > It's questionable, but unlike the abuse itself, it's not uniformly > reproachable. >=20 > But it's also frequently considered socially valuable (courageous, > heroic) to intervene, even when placing oneself at moderate risk, by > using proportional force to defend oneself or third parties from abuse > and violence. While not all disagreements can be resolved, it'd be nice to at least be able to track them down to some "axioms" on which we actually disagree. That's what I'm trying to do here and I see that proportionality is not the *only* criterion I'd apply to decide whether it is right to use force. I'd also consider whether I am using force to (1) directly defend someone, (2) "pay" an abuser for abuse already done or (3) defend someone indirectly by making a threat to a possible abuser. I'd only proceed in case of (1) whereas it seems the community would like me to at least include (3). Now, I recognize my approach is unlike and against most people's views. And it makes getting on with them hard. Sorry for the nuisance I'm causing and great thanks to those who, like Alexandre, make efforts to respond politely and acknowledge my different morality. Best Wojtek -- (sig_start) website: https://koszko.org/koszko.html fingerprint: E972 7060 E3C5 637C 8A4F 4B42 4BC5 221C 5A79 FD1A follow me on Fediverse: https://friendica.me/profile/koszko/profile =E2=99=A5 R29kIGlzIHRoZXJlIGFuZCBsb3ZlcyBtZQ=3D=3D | =C3=B7 c2luIHNlcGFyYXR= lZCBtZSBmcm9tIEhpbQ=3D=3D =E2=9C=9D YnV0IEplc3VzIGRpZWQgdG8gc2F2ZSBtZQ=3D=3D | ? U2hhbGwgSSBiZWNvbWUg= SGlzIGZyaWVuZD8=3D -- (sig_end) On Wed, 03 Jan 2024 15:17:21 -0300 Alexandre Oliva wrot= e: > Hello, Kosior, >=20 > Happy GNU year to all > https://www.fsfla.org/blogs/lxo/2023-12-31-happy-gnu-year >=20 > On Dec 27, 2023, Wojtek Kosior via "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU S= ystem distribution." wrote: >=20 > > These legal means can be considered brutal. Even if I did something > > bad to someone (which I'm trying not to), I wouldn't like them to make > > efforts to have me imprisoned or fined. Similarly, I wish not to have > > others imprisoned/fined but rather pursue justice via as peaceful means > > as possible. =20 >=20 > I acknowledge your preference to avoid litigation and coercion in > general. It's relatable. I wish to make it clear that I don't intend > to dispute that. >=20 > What I wish to do is to point out that you appear to be equating > committing violence with intervening to stop violence. >=20 > I understand denying freedom as a form of coercion and thus of violence. >=20 > Refusing to give others power to coerce third parties is not violence. > It's a common mistake for people to assume that strong copyleft licenses > take freedoms away, because they establish boundaries to one's legal > rights. But some legal rights are freedoms (i.e., about one's own > life), and others are powers (i.e., over others' lives), and it's > important to distinguish them to grasp the ethics underneath copyleft. >=20 > The legal rights that copyleft licenses grant are freedoms that everyone > should have, that copyright law takes away by default, so a license must > grant them in order to abide by ethics. >=20 > But the legal rights that copyright law reserves to copyright holders, > and that copyleft licenses do NOT extend to licensees, are powers that > nobody should have over others; those would be means of coercion, that, > if used, would amount to violence, to abuse. >=20 > When facing a situation of abuse, of violence, it may be morally > defensible for someone to turn a blind eye and allow it to proceed. > It's questionable, but unlike the abuse itself, it's not uniformly > reproachable. >=20 > But it's also frequently considered socially valuable (courageous, > heroic) to intervene, even when placing oneself at moderate risk, by > using proportional force to defend oneself or third parties from abuse > and violence. >=20 > It's ok if you choose not to be a hero. But making it a point to > announce publicly that you won't stand in the way of violence does not > look to me as good as quietly planning not to do so, which in turn > doesn't look to me as good as standing against violence to the point of > intervening when you witness it. >=20 >=20 > I hope this makes sense to you, >=20 --Sig_/wXP8llxbtzOViqTC+k0XhTL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEARYIAB0WIQTpcnBg48VjfIpPS0JLxSIcWnn9GgUCZZXOzQAKCRBLxSIcWnn9 GtdBAPoD8POBQZlp4x2djkL85X2aeQATYVU/hhdZSl0Sq38atwD/aKasAiBpFrrq q6da9b8ZyOkMV5qBJkz9nFyOag3iZQo= =UwHq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/wXP8llxbtzOViqTC+k0XhTL--