[healsdata]

Adafruit acted a bit shady here. Their original post includes:

"Military weird things"

Reading the ToS, the two mentions of military are "don't use our AI product for military use" and in the export and trade controls section.

How are either of those weird?

[ptorrone]

the carve out is weird and usually open-source does not say, no to the navy using it BUT, it's OK for DARPA ...

> Military Use: Use by or for any military organization or for any military purpose, including but not limited to projects sponsored or paid for by military organizations, or use by the U.S. Department of Defense (except for DARPA), U.S. Armed Forces, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. intelligence agencies, or any foreign counterparts of the foregoing.

[rockskon]

Given the ambiguity of the phrase "military use" when the military does, in-fact, use it for things the military does - I am not confident in the slightest with Arduino's use of language here.

[healsdata]

How would you want to see this further clarified?

> Military Use: Use by or for any military organization or for any military purpose, including but not limited to projects sponsored or paid for by military organizations, or use by the U.S. Department of Defense (except for DARPA), U.S. Armed Forces, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. intelligence agencies, or any foreign counterparts of the foregoing.

[shevy-java]

Indeed. Also because any big organisation or corporation can both do evil and good. Often research projects with guarantees to release knowledge or some other improvements such as to software projects under a permissive licence.

[snvzz]

Free Software's Freedom #0: Freedom of use.

[monegator]

>Adafruit acted a bit shady here

what is new here?

[ptorrone]

i wrote the article, just go ahead and call me shady and leave out other people at the company. limor will be back online next week after recovering (just had a kid) and you can call her shady too.