Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Sure, but that still means that the fault of not being in the ecosystem falls on the person who specifically edited their license to not be a part of the full ecosystem going forward regardless of whatever reasons they had for doing that.


Calling that a fault shows bias. You could just as well call it a choice.


A choice that results in consequences is normally how you assign fault for those consequences.


For those consciously omitting “and later”, the effect of not allowing that probably isn’t a fault, but a desired outcome.

“You can do A, B, and C with the software I wrote, or whatever X may at some future date decide you can do with it” isn’t something everybody is happy with. It certainly requires some long-term trust in what X will or will not do.


The assignment of fault and it being a desired outcome are rarely mutually exclusive concepts.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: