3 ms·
This is the whole reason why we should be using the term "free software" instead of "open source" [2]. Free software is about user freedoms; the creator is una
by CaptainFever 2y ago
This is the whole reason why we should be using the term "free software" instead of "open source" [2].
Free software is about user freedoms; the creator is unable to stop the user from redistributing or modifying the software. By using the term "open source", these freedoms end up getting ignored, until it simply gets diluted down to source availability, as seen in this article [1].
Actually, this article goes one step further and even says that free software is not free software; that is, it can have a license that restricts fundamental user freedoms. This is obviously wrong.
[1]
From the article:
> When software is open-source, it is open-source, not necessarily free and open-source (FOSS), and even if it is FOSS, it might still have a restrictive licence. The code being available in and of itself does not give you a right to take it, modify it, or redistribute it.
[2]
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point....
- Aeolun 2y ago> This is the whole reason why we should be using the term "free software" instead of "open source" The definitions in my head go something like this: Open Source -> Open (e.g. free and unencumbered) & Source available Source Available -> Only source is available, restricted under some odious license presumably Free Software -> You can download this (generally in binary form) and use it for free.
- globular-toast 2y agoWell you're wrong. The latter is referred to as freeware.
- yjftsjthsd-h 2y agoAlthough the closeness of "freeware" and "Free Software" is a problem IMHO.
- gcau 2y agoFree (as in freedom), open (like a book).
- jchw 2y agoI don't agree that this is evidence of why we should use one term over the other. If you asked an uninformed person what it meant for software to be "free" they would undoubtedly and reasonably assume it meant free of charge. This isn't really any better, imo, than people thinking that "open" source just means you can access it.