6 ms·

> When we call software “free,” we mean that it respects the users' essential freedoms What do readers here think about a new name that is more direct, such as

by jph 8y ago

> When we call software “free,” we mean that it respects the users' essential freedoms What do readers here think about a new name that is more direct, such as "freedom software", or "freedom source", or other names that emphasize the essential freedoms?

btilly 8y ago
The phrase "free software" predates "open source" by over a decade. It is of similar vintage to terms like "shareware". Any phrase that you use will require explanation. That said, you also see it called "libre software". Or you see it with the catchphrase, "Think free as in speech, not beer."
- jodrellblank 8y ago
  For the longest time I had no clue what "free as in speech, not beer" was supposed to mean; even now I don't think it fits very well - free speech is about what you have rights to create and what you have rights to say. That would be like a right to create your own software. Free speech is not about how you can re-use someone else's words, or how someone else's .. proprietary and restrictive speech can lock your data into someone else's ecosystem (see, it's a nonsensical comparison to try and write out). "Freedom respecting software. Think zero restrictions on how you use it, not zero cost". It's not as catchy, but it hints a lot more at what it means. Even "Think free as in freedoms, not price" seems more helpful. But maybe that's because I already know what it means now.
  - badsectoracula 8y ago
    "Free as in speech, not beer" is about what meaning to avoid: the "free" refers to freedom (free speech is about freedom), not price.
    - jodrellblank 8y ago
      At the time, I could see that - "it's not zero cost", but couldn't see what else (relevant) remained once you took that away. How is a kernel or a text editor like speech? Of course speech costs no money? Why is a webserver or a compiler like arguments about shouting fire in a crowded theatre? Free speech is about the person speaking and their interaction with wider society, free software is about the person listening and their interaction with the speaker and with the speech itself. It's mismatched.
      - badsectoracula 8y ago
        You focus too much on the "speech" part, it isn't like zero cost software is compared to beer. The "free as in speech" is used to disambiguate between the "price vs freedom" use of "free", not to put any connotation between software and speech. "Free as in speech, not beer" is really a short way to say "when we use the word 'free' here, we do it with the meaning that is used in the phrase 'free speech' as opposed to the meaning used in the phrase 'free beer'".
_Simon 8y ago
It depends on what freedom. GPL isn't free; it's handcuffware. It's "freedom" on someone else's terms. BSD is a truly free license whereas GPL is an attempt at an anti-capitalist license model.
- dvorak365 8y ago
  It’s free in a similar way to how preventing citizens from owning slaves is free.
- Kim_Bruning 8y ago
  The big difference between BSD and GPL (after all the legalese is said and done) is as follows: * BSD says you have the freedom to swing your fists * GPL says that your freedom to swing your fists ends at the tip of my nose. That's pretty much the difference in practice. That's actually pretty similar to how our capitalist, democratic society works. (we do restrict people's freedoms where they would end up taking away freedom from someone else). Sometimes the one approach is better, sometimes the other. Apply right tool to right job, as needed. Note that it is entirely possible to earn money using free (as in speech) software, and many quite capitalist companies do so. (ps; in my limited experience in hiring expensive lawyers to resolve legal conflicts while capitalisting: the GPL appears to deliver a lot more bang for buck than MIT or BSD. In that limited domain. MIT and BSD can be quite useful in other domains! )
  - millstone 8y ago
    The fist analogy doesn't work at all. BSD licenses do not permit face punching, literally or metaphorically.
- eeZah7Ux 8y ago
  > It's "freedom" on someone else's terms. It's freedom on my terms too: GPL protects the developer and user community from malicious patents, hostile forks, lock-down attempts, bait-and-switch-to-closed.
  - amarkov 8y ago
dvorak365 8y ago
“Civil software” is simple, accurate, sounds good, and is relatively unambiguous. It would get my vote
pera 8y ago
I honestly prefer either FLOSS or just libre software, but I guess I'm biased :) https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.html
colonelpopcorn 8y ago
Smacks of freedom fries talk that went around during the early 2000's when France wasn't so keen on joining the "Global War on Terror".
AdmiralAsshat 8y ago
We already have Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) which is designed to emphasize such things. I don't think Yet Another Buzzword™ is going to help. It's also worth noting that the issue of "free" versus "freedom" is an English-language-specific confusion and not quite as much of a problem in other languages (cf. German, "gratis" meaning no-cost vs "Freiheit" for freedom). That's partially why Stallman chose to use the Spanish term "libre" to help obviate some of that confusion.
hathawsh 8y ago
The word "libre" is gaining momentum now that people are using LibreOffice. The word is working its way into the English language: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/libre https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/libre
- jcelerier 8y ago
  le plan se déroule comme prévu !
- icc97 8y ago
  > For instance, in some contexts the French and Spanish word “libre” works well, but people in India do not recognize it at all.
acover 8y ago
Community code?
- DonHopkins 8y ago
  How about "Leftist Code"? You know, for Copyleft! ;)
eeZah7Ux 8y ago
"freedom" is an imprecise word. Most people are surprised at hearing it associated to software or books or artwork. "collaborative software" sounds more accurate to me.
- DonHopkins 8y ago
  Yeah, but as a brand, it sucks. There aren't so many Epic Rock & Roll Anthems about "Collaborative Software". But there is one about "Free Software", though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sJUDx7iEJw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sJUDx7iEJw
- JetSpiegel 8y ago
  Windows is also a collaborative piece of software. That term seems ambiguous.
herogreen 8y ago
{Emancipating,Respectful,Organic,Common,Empowering, Liberating} software come to mind. But I really like Libre software.
kashyapc 8y ago
Since we're bike-shedding, just wanted to mention: "unfettered software". It has a liberating ring to it like none other. :-) Wikipedia even says [+]: Stallman has suggested that the term "unfettered software" would be an appropriate, non-ambiguous replacement, but that he would not push for it because there was too much momentum and too much effort behind the term "free software". [+] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_terms_for_free_software https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_terms_for_free_s...
diffeomorphism 8y ago
> "freedom software" Too long, let's call it "free software" for short. It has "free" as the first word which emphasizes the essential freedoms. If you want to refer to non-free, gratis software, the term "freeware" has been common for decades and other languages don't have that annoying ambiguity problem.

by jph 8y ago

btilly 8y ago

The phrase "free software" predates "open source" by over a decade. It is of similar vintage to terms like "shareware". Any phrase that you use will require explanation. That said, you also see it called "libre software". Or you see it with the catchphrase, "Think free as in speech, not beer."

jodrellblank 8y ago
For the longest time I had no clue what "free as in speech, not beer" was supposed to mean; even now I don't think it fits very well - free speech is about what you have rights to create and what you have rights to say. That would be like a right to create your own software. Free speech is not about how you can re-use someone else's words, or how someone else's .. proprietary and restrictive speech can lock your data into someone else's ecosystem (see, it's a nonsensical comparison to try and write out). "Freedom respecting software. Think zero restrictions on how you use it, not zero cost". It's not as catchy, but it hints a lot more at what it means. Even "Think free as in freedoms, not price" seems more helpful. But maybe that's because I already know what it means now.
- badsectoracula 8y ago
  "Free as in speech, not beer" is about what meaning to avoid: the "free" refers to freedom (free speech is about freedom), not price.
  - jodrellblank 8y ago
    At the time, I could see that - "it's not zero cost", but couldn't see what else (relevant) remained once you took that away. How is a kernel or a text editor like speech? Of course speech costs no money? Why is a webserver or a compiler like arguments about shouting fire in a crowded theatre? Free speech is about the person speaking and their interaction with wider society, free software is about the person listening and their interaction with the speaker and with the speech itself. It's mismatched.
    - badsectoracula 8y ago
      You focus too much on the "speech" part, it isn't like zero cost software is compared to beer. The "free as in speech" is used to disambiguate between the "price vs freedom" use of "free", not to put any connotation between software and speech. "Free as in speech, not beer" is really a short way to say "when we use the word 'free' here, we do it with the meaning that is used in the phrase 'free speech' as opposed to the meaning used in the phrase 'free beer'".

_Simon 8y ago

It depends on what freedom. GPL isn't free; it's handcuffware. It's "freedom" on someone else's terms. BSD is a truly free license whereas GPL is an attempt at an anti-capitalist license model.

dvorak365 8y ago
It’s free in a similar way to how preventing citizens from owning slaves is free.
Kim_Bruning 8y ago
The big difference between BSD and GPL (after all the legalese is said and done) is as follows: * BSD says you have the freedom to swing your fists * GPL says that your freedom to swing your fists ends at the tip of my nose. That's pretty much the difference in practice. That's actually pretty similar to how our capitalist, democratic society works. (we do restrict people's freedoms where they would end up taking away freedom from someone else). Sometimes the one approach is better, sometimes the other. Apply right tool to right job, as needed. Note that it is entirely possible to earn money using free (as in speech) software, and many quite capitalist companies do so. (ps; in my limited experience in hiring expensive lawyers to resolve legal conflicts while capitalisting: the GPL appears to deliver a lot more bang for buck than MIT or BSD. In that limited domain. MIT and BSD can be quite useful in other domains! )
- millstone 8y ago
  The fist analogy doesn't work at all. BSD licenses do not permit face punching, literally or metaphorically.
eeZah7Ux 8y ago
> It's "freedom" on someone else's terms. It's freedom on my terms too: GPL protects the developer and user community from malicious patents, hostile forks, lock-down attempts, bait-and-switch-to-closed.
- amarkov 8y ago

dvorak365 8y ago

“Civil software” is simple, accurate, sounds good, and is relatively unambiguous. It would get my vote

pera 8y ago

I honestly prefer either FLOSS or just libre software, but I guess I'm biased :) https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.html

colonelpopcorn 8y ago

Smacks of freedom fries talk that went around during the early 2000's when France wasn't so keen on joining the "Global War on Terror".

AdmiralAsshat 8y ago

We already have Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) which is designed to emphasize such things. I don't think Yet Another Buzzword™ is going to help. It's also worth noting that the issue of "free" versus "freedom" is an English-language-specific confusion and not quite as much of a problem in other languages (cf. German, "gratis" meaning no-cost vs "Freiheit" for freedom). That's partially why Stallman chose to use the Spanish term "libre" to help obviate some of that confusion.

hathawsh 8y ago

The word "libre" is gaining momentum now that people are using LibreOffice. The word is working its way into the English language: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/libre https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/libre

jcelerier 8y ago
le plan se déroule comme prévu !
icc97 8y ago
> For instance, in some contexts the French and Spanish word “libre” works well, but people in India do not recognize it at all.

acover 8y ago

Community code?

DonHopkins 8y ago
How about "Leftist Code"? You know, for Copyleft! ;)

eeZah7Ux 8y ago

"freedom" is an imprecise word. Most people are surprised at hearing it associated to software or books or artwork. "collaborative software" sounds more accurate to me.

DonHopkins 8y ago
Yeah, but as a brand, it sucks. There aren't so many Epic Rock & Roll Anthems about "Collaborative Software". But there is one about "Free Software", though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sJUDx7iEJw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sJUDx7iEJw
JetSpiegel 8y ago
Windows is also a collaborative piece of software. That term seems ambiguous.

herogreen 8y ago

{Emancipating,Respectful,Organic,Common,Empowering, Liberating} software come to mind. But I really like Libre software.

kashyapc 8y ago

Since we're bike-shedding, just wanted to mention: "unfettered software". It has a liberating ring to it like none other. :-) Wikipedia even says [+]: Stallman has suggested that the term "unfettered software" would be an appropriate, non-ambiguous replacement, but that he would not push for it because there was too much momentum and too much effort behind the term "free software". [+] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_terms_for_free_software https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_terms_for_free_s...

diffeomorphism 8y ago

> "freedom software" Too long, let's call it "free software" for short. It has "free" as the first word which emphasizes the essential freedoms. If you want to refer to non-free, gratis software, the term "freeware" has been common for decades and other languages don't have that annoying ambiguity problem.