2 ms·
If the source was just published without any open source license, I'd call that "public code" or "code released", not specifically "open source" which comes wit
by capableweb 4y ago
If the source was just published without any open source license, I'd call that "public code" or "code released", not specifically "open source" which comes with a different understanding than just the code being released under any specific open source license.
So if the goal is user freedom, how would open source limit that? You have the right to modify the software and you have the right to re-distribute it, together or without your own changes. What "user freedom" is missing from this?
- tokai 4y agoWhy don't you look it up? Open Source was a reaction to the political implications of Free Software, that didn't float well with the private sector. The fault lines between the two are quite clear.
- capableweb 4y agoWhy don't you reply with your opinion instead? How fun would the HN comments be if we just refer people to other places, without actually referring to any specific things? You're not actually refuting anything I say, just give some vague "go look it up"...