4 ms·
> Yet much of this software is “open source” — a technology commons that can be freely used and contributed to by anyone, but at the same time, is controlled by
by DarkWiiPlayer 7y ago
> Yet much of this software is “open source” — a technology commons that can be freely used and contributed to by anyone, but at the same time, is controlled by no one person or corporation.
That's pretty much the definition of free software; so yeah... Weird choices.
- atq2119 7y agoNo it isn't. Free software is about specific software freedoms originally defined by the FSF which overlap, but are not quite accurately captured by that statement. So yeah, Stallman would object because he's all about such fine distinctions.
- jobigoud 7y agoIf I recall correctly there is only one or two licenses among hundreds that aren't both recognized by the FSF and the OSI. The differences are largely ideological, not technical/legal. I'm a fan of Open Source but my main side project is under GPL v2.