Hacker News Reader

Comment by csdreamer7 | Hacker News Reader

That is what enterprises said about Linux.

But the network effects are too strong and the GPL requiring the source code for drivers to be released increases the network effects. Unlike permissive licenses.

Busybox is still overwhelmed suing companies repeatably ignoring the GPL.

View on HN

The Software Freedom Conservancy is filing the lawsuits, IIRC.

Android's toybox emerged when Rob Landley, the main busybox developer, left the busybox project because of the lawsuits.

Toybox uses a BSD license.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toybox

I presume the point of the OP comment is that Intel ME is bad malware, and that its creation could have been prevented by making Minix GPL. Intel could have quite easily used just about any project, and there are plenty that are permissively licensed, or they could have just created one from scratch if needed.

That's a different usecase. Linux is good for general computing. Intel specifically wanted something they could close down as much as possible.

So if Minix was under GPL, Intel would probably have gone with NetBSD or FreeBSD. Or possibly something different altogether.

L4 is popular among similar corporate trojan malware deployed in secret against customers. Most of its use is by qualcom. Apparently apple are doing something similar.

This large scale deployment is apparently billed by some as the payoff for the promise of microkernels w.r.t. "security" so I guess they just don't mean yours?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com