5 ms·

Neat project, thanks! But, I gotta ask... what does the "L" in FLOSS stand for? :-) (I've only ever heard of FOSS.)

thanksgiving 2y ago
I believe it means libre or free as in free speech, not free as in free beer.
moritzruth 2y ago
Libre. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_terms_for_free_software#FLOSS https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_terms_for_free_s...
flankstaek 2y ago
Usually the L stands for Libre indicating full freedom of usage of the software and that is not just "free" as a price tag. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.en.html
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- bbor 2y ago
  Ok, this one’s baffling, especially learning at the end that FLOSS is bad because it’s meant to de-emphasize the “libre” part. All OSS software is inherently without cost, that seems unquestioned here. So free only ever means one thing to non-laypeople, in this context. So isn’t FOSS already the neutral middle ground between OSS and FS?? Regardless, I’m struggling to conceive of how a piece of software could be OS but not F. I guess if it’s, like, surveillance software known to be used by governments…? Maybe OSS that is paradoxically restrictively licensed, threatening any forks or unauthorized compilations with legal action? That seems like a terribly naive proposition, but I’m sure it’s been floated by at least one MBA… In other words: you can argue all day about the justifications for OS’ing your S being more related to removing cost barriers or to sharing control, but in the end, you clearly have to do both. Making “F[L]OSS” redundant at best, confusing at worst! Surely I’m missing something, bc I know this has been litigated for many thousands of hours both pre- and post-Eternal September. But rn it just comes across as baseless pedantry
  - diggan 2y ago
    > All OSS software is inherently without cost, that seems unquestioned here. I don't think so, you could charge money for FOSS (like charging for a built binary but having the source be FOSS) and it'll still be as much FOSS as any other FOSS out there. It isn't very common to do so, but there isn't any inherently wrong or incorrect with charging for FOSS.
    - bbor 2y ago
      How could you charge for a binary if people can just compile it on their own...? Honor system? I guess you could make it inconvenient to compile, but then is that really OSS?
      - diggan 2y ago
        > How could you charge for a binary if people can just compile it on their own...? You don't make a binary publicly available, then you put the binary behind a paywall. Some examples: - Ardour - Lets you pull down the source and compile locally for free, or you pay to use their compiled binaries. Author/creator of Ardour hangs around on HN, maybe they could share their experience if they see this. - Radium - Another DAW like Ardour, does it the same way. - Fritzing - Designer for PCBs, same approach, pay for the binaries if you'd like, but free to compile from source if you can I'm sure there are many more examples out there, but these are the ones I thought about when I wrote my previous comment.
      - globular-toast 2y ago
        It's interesting to reflect on what you're saying: you'd pay someone who forces you to, but not otherwise. So if someone built a house for you you'd only pay them if they threatened to come and burn it down, or they kept some way to remotely lock you out of it?
        bbor 2y ago
        Hmmm. Well it’s software/IP, so as always I think we need to stay away from “would you download a car” talk. With that in mind, the proposition is basically just the honor system. Which maybe works a little sometimes, among professionals? I paid for SublimeText to support them, for example. But WinRar is a very compelling counter example. It feels like publishing a pdf of a book but with a big red “don’t click this until you’ve Venmo’d me $5!” above it. Regardless of what I individually would do, that’s just kinda… goofy?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
remram 2y ago
The "F" (free), "L" (libre), and "OS" (open source) all mean the same thing, the acronym is just meant to make extra-sure to include all the ways people refer to that kind of software (last "S).
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
  They absolutely do NOT mean the same thing. There is open source software that requires payment to obtain. There is open source software that you are not free to do whatever you want with (non-libre) There is software available at no cost which is neither open source or libre. Just about every permutation of these 3 concepts has some actual example in the real world. Please do not promote the idea that they are in any way synonyms.
  - CorrectHorseBat 2y ago
    In this case they are basically synonyms, the Free in FLOSS doesn't mean free of charge and open source doesn't mean source available.
  - satvikpendem 2y ago
    What is an example of open source software that is not libre? Like the other commenter said, the F in F(L)OSS does mean free as in speech, not necessarily free as in beer.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
      People disagree about this. If F is for free as in speech, what is the L for? I've been in the GNU/libre/open source world since 1986. My experience is that the L (for libre) was added specifically because the english "Free" is ambiguous and too often interpreted as without-cost/free-as-in-beer/gratis.
      - satvikpendem 2y ago
        Libre more specifically means the GNU licenses, as GNU didn't like that licenses like MIT were being called FOSS, as they don't preserve user freedoms like (A|L)GPL do.

I believe it means libre or free as in free speech, not free as in free beer.

Libre. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_terms_for_free_software#FLOSS https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_terms_for_free_s...

flankstaek 2y ago

Usually the L stands for Libre indicating full freedom of usage of the software and that is not just "free" as a price tag. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.en.html

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
bbor 2y ago
Ok, this one’s baffling, especially learning at the end that FLOSS is bad because it’s meant to de-emphasize the “libre” part. All OSS software is inherently without cost, that seems unquestioned here. So free only ever means one thing to non-laypeople, in this context. So isn’t FOSS already the neutral middle ground between OSS and FS?? Regardless, I’m struggling to conceive of how a piece of software could be OS but not F. I guess if it’s, like, surveillance software known to be used by governments…? Maybe OSS that is paradoxically restrictively licensed, threatening any forks or unauthorized compilations with legal action? That seems like a terribly naive proposition, but I’m sure it’s been floated by at least one MBA… In other words: you can argue all day about the justifications for OS’ing your S being more related to removing cost barriers or to sharing control, but in the end, you clearly have to do both. Making “F[L]OSS” redundant at best, confusing at worst! Surely I’m missing something, bc I know this has been litigated for many thousands of hours both pre- and post-Eternal September. But rn it just comes across as baseless pedantry
- diggan 2y ago
  > All OSS software is inherently without cost, that seems unquestioned here. I don't think so, you could charge money for FOSS (like charging for a built binary but having the source be FOSS) and it'll still be as much FOSS as any other FOSS out there. It isn't very common to do so, but there isn't any inherently wrong or incorrect with charging for FOSS.
  - bbor 2y ago
    How could you charge for a binary if people can just compile it on their own...? Honor system? I guess you could make it inconvenient to compile, but then is that really OSS?
    - diggan 2y ago
      > How could you charge for a binary if people can just compile it on their own...? You don't make a binary publicly available, then you put the binary behind a paywall. Some examples: - Ardour - Lets you pull down the source and compile locally for free, or you pay to use their compiled binaries. Author/creator of Ardour hangs around on HN, maybe they could share their experience if they see this. - Radium - Another DAW like Ardour, does it the same way. - Fritzing - Designer for PCBs, same approach, pay for the binaries if you'd like, but free to compile from source if you can I'm sure there are many more examples out there, but these are the ones I thought about when I wrote my previous comment.
    - globular-toast 2y ago
      It's interesting to reflect on what you're saying: you'd pay someone who forces you to, but not otherwise. So if someone built a house for you you'd only pay them if they threatened to come and burn it down, or they kept some way to remotely lock you out of it?
      - bbor 2y ago
        Hmmm. Well it’s software/IP, so as always I think we need to stay away from “would you download a car” talk. With that in mind, the proposition is basically just the honor system. Which maybe works a little sometimes, among professionals? I paid for SublimeText to support them, for example. But WinRar is a very compelling counter example. It feels like publishing a pdf of a book but with a big red “don’t click this until you’ve Venmo’d me $5!” above it. Regardless of what I individually would do, that’s just kinda… goofy?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

remram 2y ago

The "F" (free), "L" (libre), and "OS" (open source) all mean the same thing, the acronym is just meant to make extra-sure to include all the ways people refer to that kind of software (last "S).

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
They absolutely do NOT mean the same thing. There is open source software that requires payment to obtain. There is open source software that you are not free to do whatever you want with (non-libre) There is software available at no cost which is neither open source or libre. Just about every permutation of these 3 concepts has some actual example in the real world. Please do not promote the idea that they are in any way synonyms.
- CorrectHorseBat 2y ago
  In this case they are basically synonyms, the Free in FLOSS doesn't mean free of charge and open source doesn't mean source available.
- satvikpendem 2y ago
  What is an example of open source software that is not libre? Like the other commenter said, the F in F(L)OSS does mean free as in speech, not necessarily free as in beer.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
    People disagree about this. If F is for free as in speech, what is the L for? I've been in the GNU/libre/open source world since 1986. My experience is that the L (for libre) was added specifically because the english "Free" is ambiguous and too often interpreted as without-cost/free-as-in-beer/gratis.
    - satvikpendem 2y ago
      Libre more specifically means the GNU licenses, as GNU didn't like that licenses like MIT were being called FOSS, as they don't preserve user freedoms like (A|L)GPL do.