Thinking about ways to ensure lack of corporate control in software. Copyleft has a large number of systemic exploits which corporations can use to get around it (even in the case of supposedly "strong" licenses like AGPLv3) but the one thing that I haven't seen corporations be able to work around is naughty words and having to toe a line of political correctness. In my eyes, the ideal license for something anonymously published in the United States (where you don't have to care about controversy) would be something like MIT+NIGGER, along with publishing only in source form in order to get around patent claims since source code is constitutionally protected speech and you're technically only publishing a *description* of the process as opposed to the process itself (the LAME defense).

@seseri@poa.st i guess my variable names will have to be slurs then

@MischievousTomato@poa.st :^) Of course, I meant the license and accompanying documentation, but that's another way to ward off the demonic effects of capital

@seseri@poa.st i think the best way to make a storng copyleft license is to hire like 5 of the kikest lawyers to ever walk this ear and have them do that. Maybe.

@seseri@poa.st another thing to take into account is that donators shouldn't have too much power when it comes to the project's ideas. I think this is were the bsd guys fair the best?

@seseri@poa.st >nothing is left to chance This is very important, yep. It's something I learned when I started studying CS uni last year