"First remove the closed source vendor lock in from your own codebase before checking for license issues in your neighbor's codebase" Engineerings 5:33

AWS and Azure are services, not libraries; Elasticsearch is mostly open source; and DynamoDB, well, how many people use it again?

AWS and Azure are services

A lot of people seem really confused by this, based on the number of downvotes.
- Amazon Web Services
  
  I don't think people know what AWS means, it's literally in the name.
Elasticsearch is also more rare then people realize.
AWS is closed source in some areas because they have not released the software they use to manage their platform. In other areas they have released the source code. It’s actually a pain in the ass that tools like LocalStack have evolved to fix.

Am I missing something or do two cloud computing services, two database systems, and a search engine have nothing to do with a game engine? Cuz this looks like a false equivalency whataboutism two-for-one combo to me.

It's a random list for sure, but vendor lock-in can also be a problem for companies hosting their stuff in the cloud in a similar manner to what's happening with unity.
- I suppose that's true, but then the question becomes: how many people proselytizing Godot/OSS use these services personally vs in a corporate environment where they may not have a choice? Because I'm not sure the supposed hypocrisy the meme is "joking" about actually exists.
Fallacious arguments? In the comments of my content aggregation website? I don't believe it for a second.
well sure, but dog houses aren't made out of waffles, anyways.

This meme is stupid. FOSS versions of all that crap also exist.

Out of that list, I like MongoDB. I just did bits in SQL before I started using it for the little python tools I've made for stuff.
Yeah but are you using it or are you using the closed source options?
- No, I have never used any of those closed source options. I wanted cloud services I have perfectly good esp32 lying around. And if I get worried about the vendor provided system libraries I can just buy a Raspberry Pi or something.
- Who cares? You act annoying just like Foss fan boys.

Services aren't source code lol

But you can't see the code that runs those services, stores your settings, deploys your code, etc. Services are still a liability if they go away and your project depends on it
- They're a completely different liability.
- While you are right about it being an issue, it is very different to rent a Vroot server and having to move the server and moving your game from engine to engine.
  
  And I wouldn't give shit to unity devs for choosing unity. I just don't think hosts and engines are equal.

OP...buddy...you okay? Did you hit your head or something?

Yes? What does that have to do with unity or godot?

Oh no the internet runs on computers that use "Closed Source Software" to manage the packets that flow through them! This means that if I have a website that is open source, I'm actually a hypocrite? Actually I'm not sure what the point of this comic is.

Did Mongodb change something? I’ve been using the community edition for a good long time.

Their license, the SSPL, is actually pretty fucking far from open. That being said for anyone not a platform provider it’s basically open source so you can consider it as such. You just have to deal with SSPL callouts when you do compliance reviews.

Edit: the meme says “closed source” which is patently false for Mongo
- Edit: the meme says “closed source” which is patently false for Mongo
  
  ~~No, MongoDB is closed source, proprietary software. You might be confusing open source with source available.~~
  
  Edit: Actually I am wrong sorry. Closed source is not the opposite of open source. I didn't read your comment exactly enough. MongoDB is not open source, it's not free software, it is source available and thus not closed source. The things below are still true but don't contradict what you said.
  
  The SSPL is not a free software license and it is not an open source license. The OSI said so:
  
  https://blog.opensource.org/the-sspl-is-not-an-open-source-license/
It used to be AGPL, now it's SSPL.

That's why you don't make your systems dependent on any of those tools. If Mongo goes crazy, you add an implementation to another document database, test to see if performance is good enough, and start to migrate to another database.

There's no problem in using proprietary shit. The problem is marrying stuff you can't rely on, building your house on land you don't own.

That's also one of the reasons why it isn't good to use very unique features from any service, because once you start relying on it, you get locked, AWS may have a billion services, i would normally only use those that other providers also have.

Yup, wrappers for everything you didn't build yourself. That way when you inevitably have to switch vendors, you can simply write a new wrapper using the same interface, minimal changes necessary

Opensearch exists and is a fork of the last open source version of elasticsearch.

If AWS was open source, you wouldn't be protected from a similar incident. You're primarily using them for servers and infrastructure.

Upvote for the title alone.

The one thing you can count on Godot users for is that they act exactly like Arch Linux users.

I think that's because the software comes from a similar place. You have to fight for your freedom and it takes effort, and the people that put that effort in like to feel good about it by sharing (or showing off). It's like gym-goers who like to show their hard-earned progress.

And then there's the fundamental differences in core philosophy, where a lot of friction between open and closed source projects comes in. It's warranted, but I get why it's annoying.
- The vegans of the software world.
  
  PS, I run Arch.
- Look, I might have switched to Godot if all the people recommending it weren't so annoying about it. Effort or not, the vast majority of those people did not contribute to the software, so it wasn't even their fight. They just adopted a weird oppression fetish into their personality and decided to make FOSS into their god.
  
  If someone was wronged by "Big GameDev" or whatever and developed their own FOSS replacement, then good on them, I am happy to listen about it. But the large majority of these users didn't do that, but act like they did. Just be normal, please. Being so overly annoying about it isn't going to attract more people, existing users being annoying are going to push away potential new users.
People are free to continue using proprietary software, but you can't then continue to complain when they inevitably do another shitty thing in the name of profit.

No wonder people are promoting FOSS, what else do you want to happen? I really don't get why people are so hostile to FOSS, it's literally for your own long-term benefit. How many more projects have to enshittify before people get it?
- I am not complaining about FOSS, or even saying its bad. I am saying the people that look at FOSS as if it was their god are annoying. The people that just cannot shut up and have to shove it in your face. The people that start conversations with "I use Arch" or "Godot is the best." Thats what I am talking about.

Except AWS runs on Linux...

So does the unity engine and that doesn't make it any less closed source.
- That's not what I meant by "runs on Linux." I mean the software that makes AWS servers function, behind the scenes, is Linux. You're allowed to install whatever you want on a server if you rent a server from AWS, but the software that allows you to rent a server from them and lets you set up your own server is.... Linux.
  
  AWS servers run on an operating system that is a CentOS/RHEL flavor of Linux that has been heavily modified by Amazon for their use-case.
If AWS decides tomorrow to pull a Unity, can you fork it and keep your business running? Or do you need to rebuild an entire deployment infrastructure?
- If your cloud provider decides to screw you you're gonna have to put physical infrastructure together no matter what license their software is distributed under.
- Running your server on someone else's hardware isn't the same thing as using not using open source?
  
  AWS's servers themselves run on an Amazon-modified flavor of Linux. I'm pretty sure this version already is a fork of CentOS or RHEL.
  
  If you choose to use AWS, you can choose a variety of Linux flavors to run.
  
  If you choose to leave AWS and you have to find a new hosting provider or need to procure hardware to host it yourself, that has nothing to do with the provider being open source or not. Them forking their versions of Linux really only affects Amazon internally, they're not giving their internally used version out to everyone for use. They have Amazon's Linux 2 which they do give away to everyone to use, but why would you use it when there's more open versions of Linux available?
  
  Once again, this seems mostly like people confusing using open source software and using hardware that someone else owns. Open source isn't about who owns the hardware, that's a private property issue. That's more akin to setting up your business on Amazon's lawn and then getting frustrated when Amazon isn't mowing their lawn and your business can't be seen from the road. Honestly, that's what you get for setting up shop on someone else's property where they already have their own shop.