The way I understand software licenses.

Cool bro MIT: Free to do whatever you want as long as you include a copy of the license and you can't hold the original accountable.

fair dude Apache 2.0: Like the MIT license but more bureaucratic and few more minor things you need to keep track of.

scumbag GPL: free as in the same way that prison food is free. used by java in gotcha cases as a source of revenue because no one understands java licensing. Often used in the form of a deterrent so you never dare to open up the github page.

scumbag GPL who, realising they have no friends, becomes slightly less of a dick LGPL: But please stop using this and use our more restrictive "freedom" license.

I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.

I am on a forum that is mainly professional developers. The forum is specific to one library that is owned by the company that runs the forum. The participants are mainly volunteers as the project is open source. Most of the time it is great place to exchange experiences and help new comers to the library. However lately there has been a rash of shit posts about needing help with shit unrelated to the library.
I get it on some level, but come on people try to understand what the forum is about first. Don't bring your OS and hardware issues that have nothing to do with the library. Also, go fucking read the GPL/LGPL and any other license you have questions about. Seriously, if you want to be a developer you need to at least have an idea of what you can and cannot do. Software is an IP field. Learn what IP is and the rules to follow.
I was feeling like a jerk yesterday and started giving bogus answers to obviously unrelated questions. I know, not very pro like, but come on people! The guy was asking about monitor resolutions and changes since he updated his window manager. It was his first post on the forum. He was kind of sassy too. At least my state of mind at the time interpreted it that way...

If I have a project wich use AGPL and LGPL Libraries at the same time, my project must to adopt AGPL or LGPL, I'm so confused.

In retrospection to the uproar about Qt tightening its license in a move against probably its biggest user (KDE), what do you think KDE should do from now on? Should they just trust Qt? Should they take measures? Should they fork Qt? Or, in a moment of utter madness, nuke everything and go Gtk?

It is legal to use some AGPL Library Methods into a LGPL code?

I went to create an attributions page for my node.js app I am working on. I just had it parse the packages used. Ran out of memory trying to display them in a browser.

Man I included 1 (uno) package and the dependencies are crazy. First thing I did was install license-checker to make sure I wasn't shooting myself in the foot with some random GPL/LGPL package.

So, I guess I am learning about node.js a bit this week.