09/08/2021 at 23:39 •
I think that because nothing that I have developed or rendered is up for patent, or otherwise, being used for profit alongside manufacturers, that the security of the ideas should be strengthened with the addition of a license when referring my material. While my material is not set in stone, it is a part of an open source network that discourages, copy and pasting of ideas, or otherwise not giving credit where due.
The internet should be allowed to be a series of open source discussions and thought but there is a lot of security, from where your identity might be handled as though you might not want for it to be and while limited liability is cool, there needs to provision of licensing to maintain responsibility for inventions, or discussion related to materials. You should be the determinant of how you are perceived on the internet, and not by a series of road blocks for privacy infringements, or affiliates, or flagged discussion on the programming of a greater scheme of thing entity. In a lot of ways, a matter of simpler understanding of IoT can promote stronger sense of security, in an often not so secure environment.
Even just familiarity with the medium of open source coding can strengthen your understanding of the environment that we live in today, and licensing because of it's security with awareness, and risk, when determining and deliberating through programming can work for any party that is involved.
Obviously, the licensing language may become different if you so choose to profit off of manufacturing, or coding of your own, but in the mean time just being a part of the discussion, and in a blog environment, a license sets tone for what I want to achieve with my work.