# I am the Watcher. I am your guide through this vast new twtiverse.
#
# Usage:
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/users View list of users and latest twt date.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/twt View all twts.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/mentions?uri=:uri View all mentions for uri.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/conv/:hash View all twts for a conversation subject.
#
# Options:
# uri Filter to show a specific users twts.
# offset Start index for quey.
# limit Count of items to return (going back in time).
#
# twt range = 1 9
# self = https://watcher.sour.is/conv/yrofxzq
I would agree with the original claim, that open source is broken, because we've let small groups of people (OSI and FSF) hold very arbitrary and restrictive rules that prohibit fixing the issue. The SSPL and similar solutions exist, but we refuse to embrace them because of these gatekeepers to the official definitions of FOSS.
@ocdtrekkie You'll have to elaborate on this point a bit... I'm not actually familiar with SSPL myself and frankly I don't _really_ follow "hierarchies" anyway myself, so GNU and FSF are largely mean
@ocdtrekkie You'll have to elaborate on this point a bit... I'm not actually familiar with SSPL myself and frankly I don't _really_ follow "hierarchies" anyway myself, so GNU and FSF are largely meaningless organizations to me. I prescribe more to the "ideals" and "philosophy" behind open source in general.
@ocdtrekkie You'll have to elaborate on this point a bit... I'm not actually familiar with SSPL myself and frankly I don't _really_ follow "hierarchies" anyway myself, so GNU and FSF are largely meaningless organizations to me. I prescribe more to the "ideals" and "philosophy" behind open source in general.
@prologic So the SSPL (Server Side Public License) is basically a somewhat aggressive relative of the AGPL. Basically it says if you offer the open source project as a service, you must also open source all of the "management software, user interfaces, application program interfaces, automation software, monitoring software, backup software, storage software and hosting software" around that service.
SSPL is more aggressive than AGPL, obviously, but is similarly a copyleft license which requires someone serving the software also contribute back to open source. And in most use cases, SSPL doesn't impact people: If MongoDB is SSPL, you can run a proprietary service using MongoDB in the backend with no special requirements. However, if you provide MongoDB as a service (aka, you're AWS), you might be forced to open source AWS in order to comply with SSPL. So while it is technically usable by any commercial user... in practice, it poisons the well for cloud providers.
@ocdtrekkie Ahh okay I _thought_ it was something else there for a moment. But now I recall! Thanks! 🙇♂️
@ocdtrekkie Ahh okay I _thought_ it was something else there for a moment. But now I recall! Thanks! 🙇♂️
The problem we keep seeing with open source businesses, is if it's successful enough that Amazon, Google, or Microsoft want in on it, they'll provide a service hosting your open source project cheaper than you can, without having done any of the development work or contributing anything back.
The OSI though has refused to accept SSPL as being "open source" though, so people argue that it is not. The view that I found in their discussions was that it "wasn't their responsibility" to make open source businesses viable.