4 ms·

> Slack [...] just a good faith use of free software [...] Since when is Slack free software?

by kees99 6y ago

ThePowerOfFuet 6y ago
It sounds like you are conflating free software and Free software.
- kees99 6y ago
  I don't think capitalization matters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software In addition to not being free, Slack is also not software. It's a service. Sure, there's some software involved in making that service tick (mostly proprietary), as well as some limited gratis access ("free tier") being offered, but that doesn't magically transform that service into "free software".
  - mellosouls 6y ago
    Which I clearly referred to with "free tier version of Slack". What's the complaint here? Update: you've edited the parent since I responded to it. Your original comment was something like "it's not free, part of it is free" Still no idea what you're moaning about tho...
    - kees99 6y ago
      > "it's not free, part of it is free" That's news to me. Which part of Slack do you consider to be free software? Is that the part you think GDS is using?
      - mellosouls 6y ago
        See my original comment.
    - bb010g 6y ago
      I think "freeware" is a clearer term, vs. the overloaded "free software".
  - treebornfrog 6y ago
    In this scenario, how is this all defined? Slack can be a product, software, service. Depending on which angle you look at it.
  - Avamander 6y ago
    A reasonable person would assume "without cost" until proven otherwise when reading "free software".
    - kees99 6y ago
      Free Software Foundation appear to disagree with your definition [1], while OED lists absence of monetary charge as only one of necessary characteristics of "free software" [2] [1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html [2] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/free-software https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/free-sof...
      - Avamander 6y ago
        I don't care and it doesn't matter what the FSF thinks, it's human language and they can't dictate how that works.
        rb12345 6y ago
        I'd assumed that the main difference between the capitalised version and uncapitalised version was being potentially able to trademark the former, so you could get the distinction in free-ness that way. I'm not aware of the FSF actually trademarking the term though, so I could well be wrong on that point.

> Slack [...] just a good faith use of free software [...] Since when is Slack free software?

by kees99 6y ago

> Slack [...] just a good faith use of free software [...] Since when is Slack free software?

ThePowerOfFuet 6y ago

It sounds like you are conflating free software and Free software.

kees99 6y ago
I don't think capitalization matters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software In addition to not being free, Slack is also not software. It's a service. Sure, there's some software involved in making that service tick (mostly proprietary), as well as some limited gratis access ("free tier") being offered, but that doesn't magically transform that service into "free software".
- mellosouls 6y ago
  Which I clearly referred to with "free tier version of Slack". What's the complaint here? Update: you've edited the parent since I responded to it. Your original comment was something like "it's not free, part of it is free" Still no idea what you're moaning about tho...
  - kees99 6y ago
    > "it's not free, part of it is free" That's news to me. Which part of Slack do you consider to be free software? Is that the part you think GDS is using?
    - mellosouls 6y ago
      See my original comment.
  - bb010g 6y ago
    I think "freeware" is a clearer term, vs. the overloaded "free software".
- treebornfrog 6y ago
  In this scenario, how is this all defined? Slack can be a product, software, service. Depending on which angle you look at it.
- Avamander 6y ago
  A reasonable person would assume "without cost" until proven otherwise when reading "free software".
  - kees99 6y ago
    Free Software Foundation appear to disagree with your definition [1], while OED lists absence of monetary charge as only one of necessary characteristics of "free software" [2] [1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html [2] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/free-software https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/free-sof...
    - Avamander 6y ago
      I don't care and it doesn't matter what the FSF thinks, it's human language and they can't dictate how that works.
      - rb12345 6y ago
        I'd assumed that the main difference between the capitalised version and uncapitalised version was being potentially able to trademark the former, so you could get the distinction in free-ness that way. I'm not aware of the FSF actually trademarking the term though, so I could well be wrong on that point.