It is not different from the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike license or the GNU General Public License v2+. It does not extend to content that is not derived this model.
makedeb, originally called Debian User Repository (DUR) is an AUR clone for Debian derivatives. Packages use the PKGBUILD format just as in Arch, and is mostly similar, but with changes such as use of package names based on Debian.
It also tries to support distribution specific changes, but I don't have much details on how effective it is. I don't use a Debian derivative system myself.
You cannot view the PKGBUILDs from the site, but you can clone the git repo which will contain just the PKGBUILD. The MPR subdomain and git clones seemed laggy to me, but it eventually loads (took about ~18s).
Yes, but I'm only talking about Chinese ones here. And considering just the open source boards, as I did, SiFive only has their Freedom series chips and boards, and their contributions to the Rocket Chip project.
All the Chinese ones I listed are open source designs.
And even if you hate China, it does not justify the opposition to using an open source ISA as a whole. It benefits everyone around the globe, and USA is not a special country. Others can use the ISA just the same, and it's better for them to do so.
You guys thinking in terms of countries is just as big of a problem, but again I don't have the time for that philosophy.
An open source ISA is a collaborative effort, and it contains several members, not just from the US. And it was inevitable either way. Going against who uses an open source an open source ISA is against open source, and going against open source is capitalist greed.
I won't be debating that, there are plenty of resources to read on it and it's a big topic if you are so deeply opposed to it.
Literally every open source RISC-V Chip, SoC and Board I know are Chinese, aside from SiFive. Alibaba T-Head Xuantie C9-series and E9-series CPU cores, StarFive JH7110 SoC, Alibaba T-Head TH1520 SoC, SOPHON SG2042 SoC, StarFive JH8100 SoC (TBA), several RISC-V boards from Milk-V, BananaPi and SiPeed which are state of the art RISC-V boards.
I think US are the ones doing less.
Edit: Just realized SiFive was US based, not Chinese, so edited it out.
I don't see the problem with using Anytype License instead of AGPL. AGPL allows commercial use as long as the source code is provided, while Anytype disallows commercial use. Other than that it is the same, and is "open source" regardless. As in, OSI doesn't trademark "open source".
> It's no more "open source" than, say, DaVinci Resolve is.
DaVinci Resolve is not source available.
Anytype does not restrict you from forking the code as long as it is non-commercial.
And it also lets you fork the code for commercial use, if you take their permission.
So it is simply a non-commercial open source license, with permission required for commercial use. Sure, not OSI Approved License™, but certainly "open source". If this was not "open source", neither would be GNU GPL, because it isn't permissive enough.
This is no different from Qt's dual license except that GPL allows commercial use too. Or, like Creative Commons NC licenses, but for software.
Indian government is in the process of banning all cryptocurrencies with their new bill which is said to be finalized this month. Nigeria has also banned cryptocurrency recently.
This is a trust fund for promoting Bitcoin in those countries where the governments are taking recessive steps. I think this is the only hope of turning down the ban in India right now.