What did they do to immich?!
Comment on Futo updates their website, removing logos, clarifying micro grants
turtl@lemmy.ml 3 months ago
Such a bummer that they took over Immich
muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 3 months ago
P13@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 months ago
Funded a team of devs to work on it full time.
isthereanydeal@discuss.tchncs.de 3 months ago
Pls explain. I cannot see how it is shareware with an AGPL licence behind it and full code published. Or is it just fud ?
Blisterexe@lemmy.zip 3 months ago
fud, it’s “shareware” in the sense that there’s a dismissable popup that asks you to pretty please pay 100$, but it’s AGPLv3 and no features are locked behind the paywall.
P13@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 months ago
Sorry, that’s what I grew up calling paid software that was free to use in practice. That effectively how Immich is presented now. There is a button to buy a license which changes to an (optional) supporter badge once purchased.
For the record, I am very happy with the software and paid for a license. I can see why people are bothered with Futo’s language but I personally can’t complain with how they’ve handled the project itself.
Geth@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 months ago
So immch is dead before it even matured enough to be reliable? Sad.
extremeboredom@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Still struggling to understand what makes it “dead.”
beemikeoak@lemmynsfw.com 3 months ago
It’s a big disappointment because the facial recognition is great, meaning that they could be doing bad things behind the scene. They could have a backdoor so their buddies could check to see if you’re Hispanic or non-white. That’s just one thing. Could is not is. But its enough to make me stop and think of uninstalling.
Railcar8095@lemmy.world 3 months ago
It’s still open source, not sure where this is coming from
extremeboredom@lemmy.world 3 months ago
A backdoor in what, exactly?? Please do some research into the programs you’re running so you can base your opinions on that knowledge rather than vibes.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 3 months ago
Why? Idk about you, but I like it when FOSS projects I like get a bunch of funding, especially since they retained their same license.
What exactly is the issue? Do you not like Linux either because they’re largely funded and developed by Google, Intel, etc?
isthereanydeal@discuss.tchncs.de 3 months ago
Immich is fine… full FOSS and alive. I just dont get you people.
Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 months ago
What keeps them from changing the Immich license from AGPL to FUTO?
DoPeopleLookHere@sh.itjust.works 3 months ago
Copyright.
AGPL says that the original author of any chunk of code owns the copyright to it.
Meaning to change the license you have to get every copyright holder (read every developer who has contributed code) to agree to the license change and give over the copy right.
TootSweet@lemmy.world 3 months ago
From what I’m seeing, you’re right. If there was a contributor assignment policy (some official policy associated with Immich saying that by submitting a PR, you agree to assign copyright on your code changes go the Immich project), FUTO could change the license on future versions as they wished. But it doesn’t look like there’s any contributor assignment or contributor license agreement on Immich.
To be pedantic, Immich did change from MIT to AGPLv3 a while ago. FUTO could technically scrap the current version, grab the last MIT version of the code, relicense it under their “source-first” license (or any other license they like, pretty much), and declare “this is now the official development version of Immich from which new releases will come.” That would be drastic even for FUTO, though (I don’t think that’s likely any time soon), and the community could then fork the latest AGPLv3 version with a different name and carry on with development.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 3 months ago
I keep seeing this and don’t understand it. Do people lump all the right wing crazies in with libertarians or something?
I get that libertarianism is a big tent, but it’s not a tent that covers intolerance. The foundation of libertarianism is simple:
If someone thinks it’s okay to hurt or disparage someone based on their skin color or country of origin, that’s a violation of the NAP and definitionally they’re not libertarian. A lot of people hide behind the libertarian label because they’ve been thoroughly rejected by the major parties, but that doesn’t make them libertarian.
Libertarians disagree on a lot of things, like the role of government, whether property rights exist, and what is “aggression,” but they are very consistent in rejecting hate. Libertarians were supporting LGBT folks before it was cool, and the 2024 candidate for the Libertarian Party was a gay man in complete defiance of the candidate chosen by the Mises caucus, the far right caucus that took over the party. Libertarians are about as extreme left as you’ll get on social issues, and about as extreme right as you’ll get on fiscal issues, generally speaking.
I guess I genuinely don’t understand what people see as libertarian. I consider myself libertarian, but I take my roots from Penn Jillette, and add in stuff like UBI. Here’s a great snippet from him, and my (poor) summary:
I think a social safety net crosses that threshold. I would use violence to feed my family, and I would defend someone else who does so as well, so I think it’s fair for force everyone to pay into a social safety net that ensures everyone has enough to survive using the excess of others.
My SO is a visible minority as well, and they have no issues being with me. So I guess I’m missing something about the public perception of libertarianism.