I actually love performative licensing. Notable examples are the "Stallman License" [1] and the "Pinkest Pink: Available to Everyone except Anish Kapoor" [2]
> Because the Schrödinger License r0 was released without the exception added in r2, everything in the light cone of commit https://github.com/benlk/misc-licenses/commit/0bbee5aff743e5... is subject to r0 of the Schrödinger License. If you are not sure whether you are covered by r0 of this license: calculate the time distance from 2:15 a.m. EDT July 29 2013 to the current time, multiply that by the speed of light, and draw a sphere with that radius centered on the position of North America at 2:15 a.m. EDT July 29 2013. If you are within that sphere, you are covered by the license. If you were present on Earth at that time, you are covered by the license.
crises-luff-6b · 1d ago
GPL & Copyleft are pretty anarchocapitalist as applied to ideas.
It's been a few decades since I read it, but Free Software, Free Society is pretty clear about its political intent.
No comments yet
hoseja · 1d ago
There is... another.
energywut · 1d ago
People are allowed to choose who they associate with and who they vend stuff to. This seems fine to me?
zzo38computer · 1d ago
Yes, I agree they can choose who they associate with, although my opinion is that it should not restrict others from using it if they obtain a copy indirectly (because I think that copyright and patents should be abolished).
(The actual license seems to only restrict the government from using it, though.)
readthenotes1 · 1d ago
I was talking about that with my grandfather and he recalled that no Ford dealer would sell a car to a Black person in the region he grew up in. They could only buy Pontiacs.
There is of course A distinct difference between discrimination based on characteristics you were born with and those you appear to have chosen.
But then, you get the slippery slope of sociopath and schizophrenics who have a genetic tendency towards certain behaviors... Who's to say that MAGAs or Nazis aren't born with a genetic tendency towards that behavior?
SAI_Peregrinus · 1d ago
Mountain lions are born with a genetic tendency to want to bite through the back of my neck, killing me. I have no moral obligation to assist them in exercising their genetic tendencies. I'll try to ensure they have safe habitat, with access to their natural non-human food sources, but I won't sacrifice myself for them.
Same deal with MAGAs and Nazis. Their genetic tendencies (if any) don't give them a right to harm others. When they do so, they break the social contract that gives others a reason to tolerate their behavior, just like anyone else breaking that social contract.
I'm not saying this person cares about the free software movement, or has any requirement to help it thrive, but if you do, and you license software like this, you're an idiot.
It doesn't stop "bad people" (whomever you think that is) using the software, they just disregard the license.
It does stop "good people" - people who want to comply with your license - from using your software. Because you're not a lawyer, and your license is so sloppily drafted, so loosely written, that your prohibitions could apply to almost anyone; it would take a lot of effort on their part to be sure. Your software can't be included in distros, because they can't enforce your bespoke conditions. Basically, all decent people should avoid your software for their own good.
Honestly, just look at how awful his license is: https://www.sql-workbench.eu/manual/license.html#license-res... - now note that it has not defined what "government" means or "any of its organisations" means or "directly related" means or "download" or "use" means. So let's say I'm a contractor for a third party road crew and I fill in potholes identified by the parish council, am I working for an organisation "directly related" to a "government" on the shitlist? And if I am, I could copy the software easily if given to me on a CD or USB stick (because the surrounding Apache license allows it), but I'm prohibited from "downloading" it. I'm not prohibited from "uploading" it, or having someone "upload" it to me. This guy is just a crank, he's not a lawyer, and he really didn't think this through.
Zak · 1d ago
I'm not sure putting that notice on the web page has any legal effect. The license itself[0] excludes a list of governments, which is probably a bit more more enforceable.
Probably why the wording is “not welcome” as opposed to “not permitted/allowed”
neilv · 1d ago
I'm a little bit sympathetic to the general idea of more restrictive licenses (not on this criteria), but one of the realities is that it's going to exclude more than just the people expressly excluded.
Reasons other people might also want to avoid the software include:
* Its lifecycle might be encumbered by this license (e.g., not included by some distros, and the general open source user base puts its contributions behind something more inclusive or accessible).
* For some purposes, a nonstandard license needs special vetting by lawyers for approval, and this one has what I'd guess are some legal and PR bombs in it.
* The author may be a reasonable and principled person, with their heart in the right place, who's exercised their rights in how they license their creations... But are they reacting from some crisis mode of concern about all the wrongs in the world, and could this mode deteriorate into unwelcome surprises from the much more limited perspective of third-party software users? (Will the project become abandoned? Will someone push out undesirable or even trojan software changes? Will the banned parties list be expanded in some way untenable for you?)
1vuio0pswjnm7 · 1d ago
Software developers love to discuss licenses for free software
But if these licenses are rarely enforced, then what difference does it make
Busybox is best exception that comes to mind; but enforcement seems to have fizzled out anyway
For this "SQL Workbench" software, how would license enforcement work
1. How does the author of free software detect that a Republican is using it <-- This is what I am most curious about
2. If the author detects a Republican using the software, then what will he do about it; how much is he willing to spend on lawyers
I switched to DBeaver a few years ago after realizing SQL Workbench wasn’t open source
PeterZaitsev · 1d ago
One one side creators are welcome to choose whom to offer their software, on the other I wonder how it will stand in regard to "anti discrimination" in various countries.
In any case, just please do not call this Open Source :)
RandomUser4976 · 1d ago
Brilliant! This a huge move in the right direction. I will do the same.
KevinMS · 1d ago
"If you agree with the despicable politics of the following political parties"
That's not limited to belonging to a political party, that seems to indicate agreeing with any of the politics. According to polls, the majority of americans agree with some republican policies, like reducing illegal immigration, and no boys in girl sports. Does that mean most american's cant use this?
ian-g · 1d ago
It's his software and his choice, but that's going to be difficult to enforce. With that said, there's a lot of other SQL interfaces out there.
zzo38computer · 1d ago
The actual license seems to only prohibit the government from using it.
Politicizing software has all the appeal of proprietary licensing.
This is just the inevitable fallout of our inability to have nice things.
May all find joy in their choices.
throw2727218r · 1d ago
Reminds me of Notepad++ and their stupid version names.
If they stuck to just the names that would have been less annoying, but they had a release where it would automatically start typing a message.
I stopped using it and stopped donating soon afterwards.
energywut · 1d ago
Open Source software is also political, it's just a political position you agree with. (It's a position I also agree with, fwiw.) Let's not pretend that the GPL is free of politics.
josephcsible · 16h ago
The GPL isn't free of politics, but it's only political in ways inherently related to intellectual property licensing. SQL Workbench is being political in ways unrelated to what it is.
smitty1e · 22h ago
I see the GPL as treating source code files closer to chess pieces, and insisting they remain in view.
What partisan pretensions are on offer with the GPL are unclear.
While a FSF member for decades, I take a syncretic view that the GPL is a crucial point on the licensing spectrum, and that economic value is maximized when there are products available across that spectrum for people to choose and use at will.
I guess, if we squint, this might be something of a political position, perhaps a libertarian one.
energywut · 21h ago
Politics is not limited to specific parties or governments. Politics is also concerned with the principles of an organization within their sphere, particularly if those principles are about who has access to power.
The FSF is very concerned with who has power within the relationship of software author and user -- namely that users should retain the power to redistribute and edit their software.
If someone is trying to ensure a community retains power or someone is trying to ensure a community loses access to power, that's politics too.
spacemadness · 1d ago
Comment prediction: lots of enlightened centrism.
jarbus · 1d ago
a few years ago, i'd have thought this to be excessive, but now i'm sympathetic to this.
umeshunni · 1d ago
But the Taliban is welcome to use it
energywut · 1d ago
Is the Taliban a political party? They are a government, I guess? But a party? I dunno.
FWIW, the list of parties here seems predominantly focused on the US and Europe, with one party listed from Russia. I suspect that omissions from this list are not endorsements, but rather uncommon enough on the global stage to not warrant mentioning. The author doesn't go through and mention the Klan either, but like, the Klan isn't really openly active in the US government.
ian-g · 1d ago
The website is part of the SQL Workbench repository. Submit a PR!
I'm 10000% using it now because I am a REPUBLICAN, lol
periodjet · 1d ago
I wonder how HN would react if the listed political parties were all left-wing / progressive ones.
energywut · 1d ago
I'm as far left as you can be. I would say exactly the same thing -- people should be free to associate with who they want, and vend stuff to who they want.
I've seen this line of argument before, "You wouldn't say this if it was YOUR TEAM" and like, yeah, I would? I have a belief that people should be able to freely associate? Why would it matter if it was left groups or right groups or centrist groups?
You have to break out of this "us vs them" notion of politics, it's deeply unhealthy. Parties don't matter, politicians don't matter, policies matter. Be pro/anti- some policy. Who cares what color team has that policy?
zzo38computer · 1d ago
Probably people would complain either way, but my opinion is that neither the left nor right political parties are good, and my opinion is also that the license should not make such restrictions like this whether or not you agree with those political parties. Some other people might believe similar things that I had said.
Apreche · 1d ago
Hopefully poorly, and rightly so. There is a such thing as right and wrong.
No comments yet
mike_hearn · 7h ago
Some of them actually are left wing/progressive, most obviously Bündnis Sahra Wagenknecht. Wagenknecht was actually an MP for The Left, whose politics are what you'd imagine. The CDU/CSU have spent years in coalition with the German left, also. The list appears to be simply any party that either opposes unlimited immigration, or the author suspects might not be fully in support of it, regardless of their other positions or history.
bobsmooth · 1d ago
Are there any right-wingers writing notable software?
hagbard_c · 1d ago
Yes, loads of 'm, why do you ask? In contrast to the author of this product they, just like most left-wingers who write software tend to keep their political opinions to themselves. When the author of SQLite - to stay within the SQL domain - presented the Rule of St. Benedict as their 'Code of Conduct' during the Code of Conduct wars of the second decade of the 21st century many a 'good leftie' complained that that was unacceptable - hence the reticence of those who are not in cahoots with those 'good lefties' to voice their opinion on things political. It is the loudmouths like the author of SQL Workbench who draw attention which gives some people - like you - the impression that all software authors must be 'good lefties'. This is not the case, software is produced by people from all over the political spectrum just like bread is baked by all, music is made by all, houses are built by all.
I would expect the typical American right-winger to be outright allergic to open source “communism.” (Unless they can profit off of it, of course.)
hagbard_c · 23h ago
Had free software existed in the 50's this would probably have been the case but nowadays free software is seen as the free (in beer as well as speech) alternative to products from those same companies which like to push all sorts of politicised drivel which the typical American right-winger is outright allergic to. When 'big tech' is in cahoots with the "democratic" party and allows their products to be used to push "democratic" stratagems those products and companies become tainted in the eyes of those who oppose that party and its policies. It is a bit like that Star Wars quote about someone squeezing too hard which makes star systems slip from his grip.
yahoozoo · 1d ago
lol
hagbard_c · 1d ago
It would have been more succinct to list the Germans who are allowed to use this product given the current polls:
~25% AfD
~25% CDU/CSU aka "AfD mit Substanz"
CSU
??? Werteunion
??? Die Heimat
??? Die Basis
??? Freie Wähler
??? BündnisDeutschland
~4% Bündnis Sahra Wagenknecht
This means more than half the German voting population is not welcome.
It seems that this software is only to be used by those on the left side of the political spectrum but not everyone on the left - Sahra Wagenknecht (BSW) is certainly on the left but she does not pass the mustard. SPD/Linke (the former eastern German communist party for those who don't know their history - the party which was responsible for ordering people to be shot for the 'crime' of wanting to leave the country) and the Grüne ('Greens', just like water melons they are green only on the outside but deep red on the inside) are welcome as are those remaining few FDP (a liberal party) voters. I don't know the other parties - Werteunion, Heimat, Basis, Freie Wähler and Bündnis Deutschland - but since they don't show up in the polls they're not that interesting in this context.
energywut · 1d ago
> It seems that this software is only to be used by those on the left side of the political spectrum
Democrats aren't on the left side of the political spectrum, but it appears they can use this software. (Yes, they are called the left in the US, but the mainstream positions of the Democratic party are globally center or center-right.)
But also, I would argue that modern leftist parties tend to be less interested in human rights violations and more interested in taking care of everyone (even if that means taking wealth away from the wealthy, which many would consider violative but probably isn't "contempt for human rights")
subsistence234 · 1d ago
As far as economic policy goes Democrats are neoliberals (which can be considered right wing).
They are far left on cultural topics (e.g. favoring retributive discrimination, wanting frivolous late term abortions to be legal) and far left in their attempted "solutions" to issues like homelessness (rewarding what they try to stop), crime (not enforcing the law if it would make client groups look bad, e.g. making theft under $1k a misdemeanor), education (e.g. abolishing measures of competence).
Some of that is performative, some of it is clientelism. But there are a lot of influential Democrat positions are held by sincere (cultural) leftists.
energywut · 1d ago
> favoring retributive discrimination, wanting frivolous late term abortions to be legal, etc.
I don't think these are the positions held by the Democrat party at large. I don't deny they exist within the party, but this isn't what a Biden or Pelosi are pushing for.
hagbard_c · 4h ago
The "democrat" party at large does not have a position because the Party is too fractured. From the screeching Banshees with weird hair colours and piercings who frequent all paid-for protests to the out-of-work mill working man, from the race grifters in academia to the well-meaning but ill-informed librarian in some prairie town, from the in-and-in corrupt politico syphoning off funds for her own purposes to the sheriff who just wants his county to be a safe place for all who happen to be there, who represents them in the current DNC? Who will they follow as their next leader, trusting that (most likely) she will have their interests at heart? The Party does not know because the Party has purged itself of believable candidates because they did not fit the narrative - too male, too Jewish, too sensible. By 'centring the marginalised' - their own term - they lost focus of the fact that there will always be people on the margins who in their turn will demand to be at the centre which ends up marginalising the centre which happens to be where the majority of their potential voters reside. This is why I have been calling for the Party to burn itself down to the ground so that a new (capital-D small-p) Democratic party can arise to function as effective opposition to the Republican party. While I may not be an American I do have some skin in the game since I prefer that big neighbour on the other side of the ocean to remain stable without veering off too far in either direction. Without a functioning capital-D Democratic party the risk is for the country to veer off towards whatever faction ends up taking over the Republican party once Trump has run his course in about 3½ years.
hagbard_c · 1d ago
SQL was developed by Donald D. Chamberlin and Raymond F. Boyce at IBM. Maybe the author of this piece of software should not want to use a language developed by a company which he no doubt considers to be below his moral standards?
It is a good thing that just like this person we all are free to choose which products to use and which to avoid.
As an aside I do wonder why so many former west-Germans ended up so far to the left while their former east-German compatriots - who have suffered for close to half a century under a left-wing regime - went the opposite way. I also notice that many 'educated' former west-Germans consider themselves to be morally superior to those AfD-voting former east-Germans which seems quite incongruous given the political left's insistence on using people's 'lived experience' as a guideline on where the truth lies. Does this 'lived experience' not count if it goes against the desired narrative?
Devasta · 1d ago
More licenses should do the same, this is excellent.
stretchwithme · 1d ago
I'd like to know what human rights these organizations have contempt for.
chris_wot · 1d ago
The Republican party seems to have a particular fondness for deporting innocent people to El Salvador without justification.
yahoozoo · 1d ago
You can look up the reason in the ICE database but it only supports clients using SQL Workbench…so…
stretchwithme · 1d ago
There is no human right that allows you to live in any country you want without its consent.
energywut · 1d ago
That's a different claim than the parent made. CECOT, specifically, is absolutely a place where human rights are not observed.
chris_wot · 4h ago
If you remove the rule of law, then you let tyrants reign. Best of luck with the complete breakdown of your separation of powers - it’s why you have your freedoms.
You’ll care when you need the government to heed a court decision taken against them and they completely ignore it. At that point though, it’s too late.
Incidentally, many of those who were deported did have the consent of the courts to remain.
drivingmenuts · 1d ago
They’re trying to end birthright citizenship, which basically would allow them to deport, well anybody who disagreed with them, even if that person’s has no other country be deported to.
For example, I am an American citizen, born and raised. I have never lived outside of the United States. My father, now deceased, was from Nicaragua, but he was an American citizen also. However, by ending birthright citizenship, I can can be deported simply for being liberal, if the Supreme Court allows this.
mvdtnz · 1d ago
Well first of all that's that not what ending birthright citizenship would mean. Secondly if birthright citizenship were a human right then most countries would be in violation of human rights.
chris_wot · 4h ago
It’s a violation of your civil rights as it’s a core part of the U.S. Constitution, something Americans love to try to beat other countries over the head with.
If you guys don’t care about your Constitution, then I wish you all the best of luck.
[1] https://github.com/benlk/misc-licenses/blob/master/stallman-... [2] https://stuartsemple.com/anish-kapoor-banned-worlds-pinkest-...
> # Historical note
> Because the Schrödinger License r0 was released without the exception added in r2, everything in the light cone of commit https://github.com/benlk/misc-licenses/commit/0bbee5aff743e5... is subject to r0 of the Schrödinger License. If you are not sure whether you are covered by r0 of this license: calculate the time distance from 2:15 a.m. EDT July 29 2013 to the current time, multiply that by the speed of light, and draw a sphere with that radius centered on the position of North America at 2:15 a.m. EDT July 29 2013. If you are within that sphere, you are covered by the license. If you were present on Earth at that time, you are covered by the license.
It's been a few decades since I read it, but Free Software, Free Society is pretty clear about its political intent.
No comments yet
(The actual license seems to only restrict the government from using it, though.)
There is of course A distinct difference between discrimination based on characteristics you were born with and those you appear to have chosen.
But then, you get the slippery slope of sociopath and schizophrenics who have a genetic tendency towards certain behaviors... Who's to say that MAGAs or Nazis aren't born with a genetic tendency towards that behavior?
Same deal with MAGAs and Nazis. Their genetic tendencies (if any) don't give them a right to harm others. When they do so, they break the social contract that gives others a reason to tolerate their behavior, just like anyone else breaking that social contract.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/programs-must-not-limit-freed...
I'm not saying this person cares about the free software movement, or has any requirement to help it thrive, but if you do, and you license software like this, you're an idiot.
It doesn't stop "bad people" (whomever you think that is) using the software, they just disregard the license.
It does stop "good people" - people who want to comply with your license - from using your software. Because you're not a lawyer, and your license is so sloppily drafted, so loosely written, that your prohibitions could apply to almost anyone; it would take a lot of effort on their part to be sure. Your software can't be included in distros, because they can't enforce your bespoke conditions. Basically, all decent people should avoid your software for their own good.
Honestly, just look at how awful his license is: https://www.sql-workbench.eu/manual/license.html#license-res... - now note that it has not defined what "government" means or "any of its organisations" means or "directly related" means or "download" or "use" means. So let's say I'm a contractor for a third party road crew and I fill in potholes identified by the parish council, am I working for an organisation "directly related" to a "government" on the shitlist? And if I am, I could copy the software easily if given to me on a CD or USB stick (because the surrounding Apache license allows it), but I'm prohibited from "downloading" it. I'm not prohibited from "uploading" it, or having someone "upload" it to me. This guy is just a crank, he's not a lawyer, and he really didn't think this through.
[0] https://www.sql-workbench.eu/manual/license.html
Reasons other people might also want to avoid the software include:
* Its lifecycle might be encumbered by this license (e.g., not included by some distros, and the general open source user base puts its contributions behind something more inclusive or accessible).
* For some purposes, a nonstandard license needs special vetting by lawyers for approval, and this one has what I'd guess are some legal and PR bombs in it.
* The author may be a reasonable and principled person, with their heart in the right place, who's exercised their rights in how they license their creations... But are they reacting from some crisis mode of concern about all the wrongs in the world, and could this mode deteriorate into unwelcome surprises from the much more limited perspective of third-party software users? (Will the project become abandoned? Will someone push out undesirable or even trojan software changes? Will the banned parties list be expanded in some way untenable for you?)
But if these licenses are rarely enforced, then what difference does it make
Busybox is best exception that comes to mind; but enforcement seems to have fizzled out anyway
For this "SQL Workbench" software, how would license enforcement work
1. How does the author of free software detect that a Republican is using it <-- This is what I am most curious about
2. If the author detects a Republican using the software, then what will he do about it; how much is he willing to spend on lawyers
In any case, just please do not call this Open Source :)
That's not limited to belonging to a political party, that seems to indicate agreeing with any of the politics. According to polls, the majority of americans agree with some republican policies, like reducing illegal immigration, and no boys in girl sports. Does that mean most american's cant use this?
No comments yet
- https://dbeaver.io/
- https://www.oracle.com/database/sqldeveloper/
- https://www.beekeeperstudio.io/
This is just the inevitable fallout of our inability to have nice things.
May all find joy in their choices.
If they stuck to just the names that would have been less annoying, but they had a release where it would automatically start typing a message.
I stopped using it and stopped donating soon afterwards.
What partisan pretensions are on offer with the GPL are unclear.
While a FSF member for decades, I take a syncretic view that the GPL is a crucial point on the licensing spectrum, and that economic value is maximized when there are products available across that spectrum for people to choose and use at will.
I guess, if we squint, this might be something of a political position, perhaps a libertarian one.
The FSF is very concerned with who has power within the relationship of software author and user -- namely that users should retain the power to redistribute and edit their software.
If someone is trying to ensure a community retains power or someone is trying to ensure a community loses access to power, that's politics too.
FWIW, the list of parties here seems predominantly focused on the US and Europe, with one party listed from Russia. I suspect that omissions from this list are not endorsements, but rather uncommon enough on the global stage to not warrant mentioning. The author doesn't go through and mention the Klan either, but like, the Klan isn't really openly active in the US government.
I've seen this line of argument before, "You wouldn't say this if it was YOUR TEAM" and like, yeah, I would? I have a belief that people should be able to freely associate? Why would it matter if it was left groups or right groups or centrist groups?
You have to break out of this "us vs them" notion of politics, it's deeply unhealthy. Parties don't matter, politicians don't matter, policies matter. Be pro/anti- some policy. Who cares what color team has that policy?
No comments yet
[1][ https://www.sqlite.org/codeofethics.html
It seems that this software is only to be used by those on the left side of the political spectrum but not everyone on the left - Sahra Wagenknecht (BSW) is certainly on the left but she does not pass the mustard. SPD/Linke (the former eastern German communist party for those who don't know their history - the party which was responsible for ordering people to be shot for the 'crime' of wanting to leave the country) and the Grüne ('Greens', just like water melons they are green only on the outside but deep red on the inside) are welcome as are those remaining few FDP (a liberal party) voters. I don't know the other parties - Werteunion, Heimat, Basis, Freie Wähler and Bündnis Deutschland - but since they don't show up in the polls they're not that interesting in this context.
Democrats aren't on the left side of the political spectrum, but it appears they can use this software. (Yes, they are called the left in the US, but the mainstream positions of the Democratic party are globally center or center-right.)
But also, I would argue that modern leftist parties tend to be less interested in human rights violations and more interested in taking care of everyone (even if that means taking wealth away from the wealthy, which many would consider violative but probably isn't "contempt for human rights")
They are far left on cultural topics (e.g. favoring retributive discrimination, wanting frivolous late term abortions to be legal) and far left in their attempted "solutions" to issues like homelessness (rewarding what they try to stop), crime (not enforcing the law if it would make client groups look bad, e.g. making theft under $1k a misdemeanor), education (e.g. abolishing measures of competence).
Some of that is performative, some of it is clientelism. But there are a lot of influential Democrat positions are held by sincere (cultural) leftists.
I don't think these are the positions held by the Democrat party at large. I don't deny they exist within the party, but this isn't what a Biden or Pelosi are pushing for.
It is a good thing that just like this person we all are free to choose which products to use and which to avoid.
As an aside I do wonder why so many former west-Germans ended up so far to the left while their former east-German compatriots - who have suffered for close to half a century under a left-wing regime - went the opposite way. I also notice that many 'educated' former west-Germans consider themselves to be morally superior to those AfD-voting former east-Germans which seems quite incongruous given the political left's insistence on using people's 'lived experience' as a guideline on where the truth lies. Does this 'lived experience' not count if it goes against the desired narrative?
You’ll care when you need the government to heed a court decision taken against them and they completely ignore it. At that point though, it’s too late.
Incidentally, many of those who were deported did have the consent of the courts to remain.
For example, I am an American citizen, born and raised. I have never lived outside of the United States. My father, now deceased, was from Nicaragua, but he was an American citizen also. However, by ending birthright citizenship, I can can be deported simply for being liberal, if the Supreme Court allows this.
If you guys don’t care about your Constitution, then I wish you all the best of luck.