@leon@peoplemaking.games @whitequark@mastodon.social @lunarood@mastodon.gamedev.place @mcc@mastodon.social Academia does absolutely do things that are broadly applicable products which hateful morons can immediately and freely exploit and weaponise en masse and people have quit research over it https://x.com/pjreddie/status/1230524770350817280 And like in general, I personally like to work on software distributed freely and without any limitations on who can use it, because in any other way, you are only discriminating the people with few resources, and never the other way around. It is impossible to "stop the bad guys from having it but keep the good guys in". It's like backdoors in encryption, you can't keep only the good guys in. We already have plenty of evidence of companies disregarding the terms of open source software licenses, which don't even restrict use, just require attribution or release of modifications. Why would anyone think that if *hobbyists* started to use such licenses, companies would suddenly be scared of the potential legal repercussions (because we all know no company has seriously backed any ethical source thing). By going that route, you're also essentially giving up *any* opportunity from getting any kind of help from companies, leaving only hobbyists on the line. And I can assure you, *wast* majority of FOSS work is done with company sponsorship these days. It's the way for those companies to commoditize their complements, implicitly share development costs between them, and improve their image as an employer. Most of open development will continue in precisely that way, even if no hobbyist participates in that. So would such hobbyist exodus really change things?