roonilwaslib's comments

I run operations for a company that relies heavily on R, and I'd strongly advise against using the language. R's package management system makes reproducing work difficult. We've had to rely on using renv, a snapshot of CRAN (the default source of R packages: some FTP servers), and a bunch of Docker to get vaguely reproducible installs. However, since R installing a package involves compiling that code that you just downloaded from a public FTP server, installs are extremely slow.

I'd recommend python based on the slightly-saner tooling. I've found that python with conda/pipenv/poetry results in mostly reproducible installs of the tools needed to run a computation.

> It _is_ hard

Using modular licenses might mitigate the problem of managing a frankendocument, but I have to agree: making ethos licensing viable would require a ton of effort. The SPDX (Software Package Data Exchange) standard includes boolean expressions to combine licenses[0], like `MIT AND ISC`. It would be difficult but conceivable for a lawyer to write human-readable and enforceable licenses each forbidding one specific use. Bundling licenses with `AND` into cohesive super-licenses covering ethical standards would take more effort. Figuring out what ethical standards a large-enough ecosystem of engineers agrees upon is another herculean task.

Still, I think the efforts are worth it: I'd like to opt out of some subsidizing fields of endeavor but not others. IANAL, just a programmer, but I'd be interested in contributing to ethos-licensing-related projects.

[0]: https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/appendix-IV-SPDX-license-ex...

From the second item on their FAQ (https://projectvesta.org/frequently-asked-questions/): > The Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) of the release of CO2 from mining, milling, and transport of olivine creates an approximately 4-6% loss on CO2 removed.

I'd still like to see the LCA.