User, what is your preferred software license?

Are you retarded? This has nothing to do with the GPL, but the fact that the Firefox branding is proprietary. See the bindist USE flag in Gentoo.

Ah user great! I did not realize the GPL allowed me to distribute an executable without providing access to the modified source. I will tell my buddy Bill Gates at Microsoft and we will take advantage of that!

this is genuinely what license fags believe. Uncuck your homosexual mind retard.

MIT, public domain and maybe LGPL because:
1. afaik there is no real way to prove that someone is using your gpl code in his closed-source software so you might aswell use something permissive that wont cuck the people that actually want to follow your license
2. people should use free software because they want to and because it is moral, not because they are enforced
3. software projects should be made for joy of the creator and user with honesty and not as means to sell your propaganda

CC0 or MIT

BSD
-Simply because of results. It's the best of both worlds. FOSS, but corps are allowed to do what they want as well and take a top down approach and force a particular Vision TM. To this day, nothing in GNU world has made as solid of a desktop OS as OS X.. or game console like the PS4 (I think even Nintendo's Switch uses BSD as well).

Yeah, BSD has many commercially successful gadgets. But Linux also includes Android that is the most successful mobile OS!

I release my shit under BSD, MIT or TAPR-OSHL

Why:
I like proven licenses with freedom in them. GPL and it's variants have annoying restrictions, so I don't use them for my personal projects.
I don't particularly care what people use them for, thus BSD.

Android is less and less free. Google as been steadily transferring more and more functionality from AOSP to their proprietary layers.
In the name of compatibility, security and usability.

You keep engaging the troll/retard. He keeps saying lies and at no moment has pointed to the license itself.
The GPLv3 is certainly longer than BSD or MIT style licenses, but it's no bank contract; it can still be read in a few minutes.

>gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html

In other words, you can provide access to binaries, but you have to point to the source code as well. Either you provide the source code in your server, or you link to a server where the source code is available.
The section 7 of the GPLv3 points to additional terms such as requiring that *derivative* works don't use the trademarks of the base work, but for *verbatim* copies there's no such restriction. If you do a small change that doesn't merit a complete rebranding (e.g. removing Pocket from Firefox), then the Firefox people *could* ask you that you clearly mark your Firefox version as a modified one instead.

Aka for the 50th time uploading a binary to my blog is illegal. Your license says it right there. Inb4 it does not count becausee you can also do xyz.