3 ms·

At least Google and Apple are big contributors to open source software (e.g. Chromium, CUPS). Instead of roasting big companies (because... privacy?) we should

by mkettn 8y ago

At least Google and Apple are big contributors to open source software (e.g. Chromium, CUPS). Instead of roasting big companies (because... privacy?) we should work together. This picture does more harm, because it view companies purely as enemies.

saagarjha 8y ago
> At least Google and Apple are big contributors to open source software (e.g. Chromium, CUPS). …that's a strange choice. Basically every company in that comic contributes in some way to open source.
- kome 8y ago
  Contributing to open source is not contributing to free software, the big 5 are indeed all doing quite the opposite: creating walled gardens, trying to monopolize the distribution of software and goods, and pushing for a web monoculture. Also, they are making the web a more centralist and frankly, boring, place.
  - pmoriarty 8y ago
    "creating walled gardens, trying to monopolize the distribution of software and goods, and pushing for a web monoculture" ...and spying on users.
  - saagarjha 8y ago
    That's why I said "open source" and not "free software". Those companies do contribute a bit to "free software", but really only in token amounts.
Phenix88be 8y ago
Open source is NOT free software. You are not free because you are using Chromium instead of Chrome. Free software is a philosophy, Open source just mean every one can read the source. You can contribute to Open Source and be evil...
- icebraining 8y ago
  Chromium is free software, just like the vast majority of open source. The philosophies are certainly different, but the code produced by one generally fits the other definition as well. MIT, BSD, Apache, WTFPL, etc - all of these licenses fit both the open source and free software definitions.
- majewsky 8y ago
  Well technically, when you can just read the source, it's not called "Open Source", but rather "Shared Source".
  - tasn 8y ago
    I think the term source-available is more commonly used. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source-available_software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source-available_software
sridca 8y ago
Sensible comment getting downvoted by alarmist HN. What a surprise.

by mkettn 8y ago

saagarjha 8y ago

> At least Google and Apple are big contributors to open source software (e.g. Chromium, CUPS). …that's a strange choice. Basically every company in that comic contributes in some way to open source.

kome 8y ago
Contributing to open source is not contributing to free software, the big 5 are indeed all doing quite the opposite: creating walled gardens, trying to monopolize the distribution of software and goods, and pushing for a web monoculture. Also, they are making the web a more centralist and frankly, boring, place.
- pmoriarty 8y ago
  "creating walled gardens, trying to monopolize the distribution of software and goods, and pushing for a web monoculture" ...and spying on users.
- saagarjha 8y ago
  That's why I said "open source" and not "free software". Those companies do contribute a bit to "free software", but really only in token amounts.

Phenix88be 8y ago

Open source is NOT free software. You are not free because you are using Chromium instead of Chrome. Free software is a philosophy, Open source just mean every one can read the source. You can contribute to Open Source and be evil...

icebraining 8y ago
Chromium is free software, just like the vast majority of open source. The philosophies are certainly different, but the code produced by one generally fits the other definition as well. MIT, BSD, Apache, WTFPL, etc - all of these licenses fit both the open source and free software definitions.
majewsky 8y ago
Well technically, when you can just read the source, it's not called "Open Source", but rather "Shared Source".
- tasn 8y ago
  I think the term source-available is more commonly used. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source-available_software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source-available_software

sridca 8y ago

Sensible comment getting downvoted by alarmist HN. What a surprise.