3 ms·
> Claiming that it is closer to proprietary software when users still get the source and the same freedoms as FOSS is disingenuous They absolutely do not get t
by happymellon 3y ago
> Claiming that it is closer to proprietary software when users still get the source and the same freedoms as FOSS is disingenuous
They absolutely do not get the same freedoms as FOSS. That's literally the point of source available, it isn't FOSS.
Not bad, not closed source, but not FOSS. Although I don't believe you quite meant it like that based upon the essay.
- gavinhoward 3y ago> Not bad, not closed source, but not FOSS. Although I don't believe you quite meant it like that based upon the essay. Oh, I did. But my point in the essay is that FOSS can actually be bad for end users because companies can make a lot of it proprietary. Actually proprietary. And they do. This is worse for users than copyleft SAMS. The people who keep claiming that SAMS gives less control to end users are dealers.
- happymellon 3y agoBut it contradicts what you say because I cannot use it to support other people.
- gavinhoward 3y agoYes, you can. You just can't make money from that support.