@rory that’s exactly right. It’s important to look at alignment of interests instead of trying to divine intent.
@rory might as well leave my hot take on the matter: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/woodpeck/diary/391480#comment46005
OpenStreetMap Foundation politics
No offense to @migurski on this, and his extensive previous work with considerably better behaved corporate entities with interests in OSM. I have a hard time believing that he wouldn’t become a proxy for FB, to the detriment of OSM’s interests and his own personal interests. Especially fresh on the heels of the GlobalLogic debacle and FB’s involvement in severely and possibly irreparably harming humanitarian and political processes in entire sovereign countries.
@rory I strongly disagree with this blog, though.
OSM needs to find a way to align itself with corporations, the alternative is an irrelevant hobby project for some dedicated mappers.
Facebook might be evil, but WRT OSM they have not yet shown that. Sure, when OSM depends on only FB, it would be bad. But currently it's aligned with mulitple corps that often are competitors amongst eachother. IMO *that* is Open Source: be the hub where competition can cooperate on something great.
@berkes FB's initial #OSM imports weren't evil per se, just hella careless and v disruptive. There's still disagreements from local communities in SE Asia about their contributions there. Hence, I'm not sure “They've been fine up to now” is 100% accurate. They have improved a lot, but I think that's cause the OSM community forced them to.
Worst thing is they try to do what Mapbox was pushing a a few years ago, change the licence to remove the share-alike clause.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!