You might be interested in reproducible-builds.org or f-droid.org/en/docs/Reproducible_Builds

Visibility :/

I am no dev of rust.

My guess:

• they didn’t want to scare anyone.
• They really think that MIT is free and that anyone shall do with it whatever they like. They are not afraid that someone takes the rust code base and produces a proprietary fork and make money from it.

You are allowed to license your code change under gpl, you do not have to use MIT just because the package author uses MIT. You can use GPL.

You can also use MIT or no license at all. it does not force you to use MIT

You could say that, yes.

It makes sense to suggest MIT license for a MIT project

MIT is better than proprietary. MIT does not force you to not make your project free.

It’s kind of the default in the docs

https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/reference/manifest.html?highlight=License#the-license-and-license-file-fields

SPDX license expressions support AND and OR operators to combine multiple licenses.1

  [package]
   # ...
  license = "MIT OR Apache-2.0"

Using OR indicates the user may choose either license. Using AND indicates the user must comply with both licenses simultaneously. The WITH operator indicates a license with a special exception. Some examples:

MIT OR Apache-2.0
LGPL-2.1-only AND MIT AND BSD-2-Clause
GPL-2.0-or-later WITH Bison-exception-2.2

When I started out (I don’t write Rust but other languages), in my first years, I liked gpl and after a couple of years I got to know MIT and I started using that because I thought it is “more free”. I wasn’t aware of the consequences immediately. Once I read the GNU philosophy and started reading more about free software, I started using gplv3 again

Good for you

Poor prof

Are you still using matlab? Why? Seriously

I was curious. Not mocking you :)

I could imagine living in a valley, or an alpine hut.

Paypal has 500 mb and just shows a number and you can press a button to send a number to their server.

It’s insane

What’s a/your use case?

Why did you post that implementation and not David Frank’s with 1.7 Terrabit/s ?