3 ms·

Yes, I was using open source as a catch all term for free, both because free is far easier to misunderstand, and because free tends to create negative connotati

Yes, I was using open source as a catch all term for free, both because free is far easier to misunderstand, and because free tends to create negative connotations for many people, especially at the large scale end. I know the FSF disapproves of that usage, but it seems convenient to me, it's one of the most common descriptions I see, and the alternatives are primarily acronym-based like FOSS, FLOSS, etc. and don't roll off the tongue as easily. None of that invalidates the point; namely that the FSF thinks that only free software should be allowed to be promoted to users (and possibly other software outright discouraged), which I find identical to DRM mindsets, just in the opposite direction

vezzy-fnord 12y ago
Yes, I was using open source as a catch all term for free, both because free is far easier to misunderstand, and because free tends to create negative connotations for many people, especially at the large scale end. Open source is very easy to misunderstand, as well. A lot of companies have been abusing the term by giving (limited) source code access without any actual rights to the code itself, and then calling their products "open source". I know the FSF disapproves of that usage, but it seems convenient to me, it's one of the most common descriptions I see, and the alternatives are primarily acronym-based like FOSS, FLOSS, etc. and don't roll off the tongue as easily. It's funny, because "convenience over ethics" is one of the major points that the FSF opposes. And there is a smooth and unequivocal alternative: libre.
- blueskin_ 12y ago
  Libre suffers from the same problem as 'free' perception-wise, and has the bonus issue of being hard to know if you're pronouncing it right. Libre means free, so any word association issues around free will apply by default. Also, not all open source software is free in price terms, which free/libre creates confusion around.
  - phaemon 12y ago
    No, libre does not mean "free as in zero-cost" it means "free as in freedom". The word for zero-cost is gratis.
    - dragonwriter 12y ago
      > No, libre does not mean "free as in zero-cost" it means "free as in freedom". Prior to its adoption by the Free Software community to resolve the distinction, it was obsolete and virtually unused in English; while it was used in English with that meaning, it was no longer current at the time, and in some of the languages where the word is current -- and where people it in fact has the same "zero-cost" vs. "having the quality of liberty" ambiguity as "free" has in English. Using current, widely used, and idiomatic English terms that address the distinction -- "complimentary" vs. "unencumbered" rather than "gratis" vs. "libre", for instance -- would probably be more clear to people outside the movement than adopting terms that had fallen into general disuse in English. Specialized and unfamiliar-to-the-general-public language can be good for jargon intended to make technical distinctions in a closed community, but its a barrier to communicating with the wider public.
      - phaemon 12y ago
        No it wasn't "obsolete and virtually unused" - at least, not in the UK. I knew what libre meant back when I was a youngster, long before I'd ever heard of the FSF. I suspect the vast majority of literate English speakers could tell you what libre meant and wouldn't think of it having any connection with software at all. It's an English word borrowed from the French, not computer jargon.
    - blueskin_ 12y ago
      Exactly; so deliberately using a word with a double meaning is counterproductive there.

vezzy-fnord 12y ago

Yes, I was using open source as a catch all term for free, both because free is far easier to misunderstand, and because free tends to create negative connotations for many people, especially at the large scale end. Open source is very easy to misunderstand, as well. A lot of companies have been abusing the term by giving (limited) source code access without any actual rights to the code itself, and then calling their products "open source". I know the FSF disapproves of that usage, but it seems convenient to me, it's one of the most common descriptions I see, and the alternatives are primarily acronym-based like FOSS, FLOSS, etc. and don't roll off the tongue as easily. It's funny, because "convenience over ethics" is one of the major points that the FSF opposes. And there is a smooth and unequivocal alternative: libre.

blueskin_ 12y ago
Libre suffers from the same problem as 'free' perception-wise, and has the bonus issue of being hard to know if you're pronouncing it right. Libre means free, so any word association issues around free will apply by default. Also, not all open source software is free in price terms, which free/libre creates confusion around.
- phaemon 12y ago
  No, libre does not mean "free as in zero-cost" it means "free as in freedom". The word for zero-cost is gratis.
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    > No, libre does not mean "free as in zero-cost" it means "free as in freedom". Prior to its adoption by the Free Software community to resolve the distinction, it was obsolete and virtually unused in English; while it was used in English with that meaning, it was no longer current at the time, and in some of the languages where the word is current -- and where people it in fact has the same "zero-cost" vs. "having the quality of liberty" ambiguity as "free" has in English. Using current, widely used, and idiomatic English terms that address the distinction -- "complimentary" vs. "unencumbered" rather than "gratis" vs. "libre", for instance -- would probably be more clear to people outside the movement than adopting terms that had fallen into general disuse in English. Specialized and unfamiliar-to-the-general-public language can be good for jargon intended to make technical distinctions in a closed community, but its a barrier to communicating with the wider public.
    - phaemon 12y ago
      No it wasn't "obsolete and virtually unused" - at least, not in the UK. I knew what libre meant back when I was a youngster, long before I'd ever heard of the FSF. I suspect the vast majority of literate English speakers could tell you what libre meant and wouldn't think of it having any connection with software at all. It's an English word borrowed from the French, not computer jargon.
  - blueskin_ 12y ago
    Exactly; so deliberately using a word with a double meaning is counterproductive there.