Linked by David Adams on Tue 3rd Aug 2010 17:23 UTC, submitted by fsmag
Free Software Magazine published an interesting lexicon of terms that are thrown around within the Free Software and Creative Commons worlds that have particular meaning, and might not be familiar to people who aren't open source or free culture advocates.
Thread beginning with comment 435334
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-01-31
I wish Stallman was slightly more pragmatic, and would abandon the counterintuitive term 'free software' in favour of something less ambiguous.
Less clear than freedom ? What do you want ?
The FSF adopting 'open source' would be simplest, since the ideological difference between 'open source' and 'free software' is in practice incredibly small,
Not that small. Free Software is far more ethical than open-source.
and it would allow the FSF to put its emphasis on 'copyleft'. Still, they find it objectionable due to its lack of emphasis on freedom and, although they probably wouldn't admit it, FSF control.
No comment...
Even so, there's still options that are more freedom-oriented. Why not 'liberated software'? It's a more brand-aware version of 'software libre' and I'm sure you could bring the OSI people on board with such a term, uniting everybody under a single banner.
Liberated means they were caught in jail before. Not really good.
Sadly, it's clear that Stallman has decided that changing the English language is easier than changing his own brand. A tiny, tiny amount of pragmatism really would go a long way.
He has done more than you I think to help freedom and not only in computing.
As we say in France : "Les moralisateurs sont les plus immoraux". Don't know the english for it, sorry.
Member since:2007-02-17
Member since:2009-02-10
Google "free software". 7 out of the top 10 websites (excluding sponsored links) refer to 'freeware'. If you asked someone who had never heard of 'free software' what it meant, they'd think of 'freeware'. It's not clear and unambiguous. Free beer doesn't imply beer with freedom to most people. There's a reason why 'open source' and 'FOSS' exist.
The definitions about 'open source' and 'free software' aren't about morality. In fact, the FSF concede the difference is subtle, the main difference being where the emphasis is.
Liberated in contrast with proprietary software. Since the FSF regard proprietary software as immoral, perhaps the prison comparison is apt.
Just because someone has made a positive contribution doesn't make them immune from criticism. By creating the GPL and GCC, he helped bring computing forward. I don't think he has since.
Member since:2009-10-04
Less clear than freedom ? What do you want ?
In English, most people associate "free" with no cost or gratis. There really is no word in English that corresponds with "libre", which is what RMS means when he talks about "free software". Thus, it causes confusion. If you ask a random person off the street what they think "free software" means, they'll say software that doesn't cost anything.
Not that small. Free Software is far more ethical than open-source.
How? They mean the same thing. The term "open source" was simply created to avoid the confusion caused by "free software".
Imagine these situations:
1. I write an awesome new program licensed with GPLv3. I call it "free software".
2. I write an awesome new program licensed with GPLv3. I call it "open source".
Are you somehow saying that I am being more ethical in situation 1?
Member since:2007-02-17
The FSF adopting 'open source' would be simplest, since the ideological difference between 'open source' and 'free software' is in practice incredibly small, and it would allow the FSF to put its emphasis on 'copyleft'. Still, they find it objectionable due to its lack of emphasis on freedom and, although they probably wouldn't admit it, FSF control.
I think you are very confused here. The FSF do not control most of the software written under copyleft license terms (i.e. the GPL).
The FSF wrote the GPL, but it is a template.
For example a project, such as KDE, writes software, and licenses it under the GPL. All that means is that the KDE project has taken a copy of the GPL text, and used it as the license text for their project. It is like a template. KDE might have done a search-and-replace and replaced all occurrences of the text string "the software" in the GPL template text with the text string "the KDE Software Collection". Now the GPL template text has become KDE's license, for KDE's software.
The KDE SC software, even though it is licensed under GPL terms, is completely owned by the KDE project (who wrote the code). FSF has absolutely no control over it, and no ownership of it, whatsoever.
Edited 2010-08-04 12:53 UTC
Member since:2009-02-10
I'm not confused at all, you just completely misunderstood what I meant.
The definition of open source is set by OSI, with open source licences typically being OSI-approved.
The definition of free software is bet by the FSF, with free software licences typically beeing FSF-approved.
If FSF pragmatically adopted the term 'open source', people would be less likely to care about licences being FSF-approved. This would reduce FSF's influence on free/open source software.
Member since:2008-06-02
I wish Stallman was slightly more pragmatic, and would abandon the counterintuitive term 'free software' in favour of something less ambiguous.
The ambiguity is a deliberate marketing ploy, done for the same reasons that people try to paint stark puritanism as "family values". If anyone dissents, they can be shouted down with Bush-esque rhetoric about "hating freedom". You don't hate freedom, do you?!?!?!?
And of course the term "free software" is so much more catchy than "software that is restricted in ways that promote 'freedoms' that we have arbitrarily deemed to be more important than all others".
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
The third and final WWDC product I want to talk about is - of course - OS X 10.9 Mavericks. While iOS 7 was clearly the focus of this year's WWDC, its venerable desktop counterpart certainly wasn't left behind. Apple announced OS X 10.9 Mavericks, the first OS X release not to carry the name of a big cat.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
We already talked about iOS 7 yesterday (after a night of sleep, it's only looking worse and worse - look at this, for Fiona's sake!), so now it's time to talk about the downright stunning and belly flutters-inducing new Mac Pro. As former owner and huge, huge, huge fan of the PowerMac G4 Cube - I haven't been this excited about an Apple product since, well, I would say the iMac G4. This is the Apple I used to love.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Apple held its big keynote event thing at WWDC earlier this evening, but since I was away with friends I've had to read up on it later in the evening. The company announced iOS 7, OS X 10.9 Mavericks, and they gave a preview of the new Mac Pro. Especially the Mac Pro impressed me, and while iOS 7's new Holo/Metro-inspired theme looks messy and garish to me, I do commend Apple for finally breaking the mold. This news item will focus on iOS 7 - I'll dive into the Mac Pro and OS X 10.9 tomorrow (it's late here now).
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
And yes, the PRISM scandal is far, far from over. More and more information keeps leaking out, and the more gets out, the worse it gets. The companies involved have sent out official statements - often by mouth of their CEOs - and what's interesting is that not only are these official statements eerily similar to each other, using the same terms clearly designed by lawyers, they also directly contradict new reports from The New York Times. So, who is lying?
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
This story is getting bigger and bigger. Even though most Americans probably already knew, it is now official: the United States government, through its National Security Agency, is collecting the communications and data of all American citizens, and of non-Americans using American services, through a wide collaboration with the large companies in technology, like Apple, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and so on. Interestingly enough, the NSA itself, as well as the US government, have repeatedly and firmly denied this massive spying on Americans and non-Americans took place at all.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Ah, patents - the never-ending scourge of the technology industry. Whether wielded by companies who don't actually make any products, or large corporations who abuse them because they can't compete in the market place or because they're simply jerks, they do the industry a huge disservice and are simply plain dangerous. According to The Wall Street Journal (circumvention link), president Obama is about to take several executive actions to address patent trolls - which may seem like a good idea, but I am very worried that all this will do is strengthen the positions of notorious patent system abusers such as Apple and Microsoft.
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
With version 13.05, the developers of the Genode OS Framework take measures to ensure that Genode continues to scale well with a growing number of users and the steadily broadening platform coverage. Further highlights are the improved SoC support for Exynos 5, OMAP4, Raspberry Pi, i.MX, and new components for realizing headless systems.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
At the D11 conference, Apple CEO Tim Cook once again took the stage to be interviewed by Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher. While most of the interview can be replicated by picking and reading 10 random Apple fanblog stories - there were still a number of very interesting things that warrant some closer scrutiny.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
So, the Xbox One disaster continues. Microsoft's policy for dealing with the used games market has reportedly leaked - and it's a clear and direct attack to destroy the used games market. Prices for used games will be set at the retail value of a new game, and retailers have to hook into Microsoft's computer systems and comply with Microsoft's terms and conditions.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
At an event earlier today, Microsoft unveiled the next Xbox - the third model, but confusingly named Xbox One. The big focus was TV, integrated Kinect, and all the other stuff we all expected to be forced down our throats. I think it took them 25 minutes to actually come to what should be the core of the story: gaming. Nothing groundbreaking in the gaming department, except for how Microsoft intends to handle the used games market and borrowing games from friends: pay up, buddy!More Features »
Sponsored Links
Member since:
2009-02-10
I wish Stallman was slightly more pragmatic, and would abandon the counterintuitive term 'free software' in favour of something less ambiguous.
The FSF adopting 'open source' would be simplest, since the ideological difference between 'open source' and 'free software' is in practice incredibly small, and it would allow the FSF to put its emphasis on 'copyleft'. Still, they find it objectionable due to its lack of emphasis on freedom and, although they probably wouldn't admit it, FSF control.
Even so, there's still options that are more freedom-oriented. Why not 'liberated software'? It's a more brand-aware version of 'software libre' and I'm sure you could bring the OSI people on board with such a term, uniting everybody under a single banner. Sadly, it's clear that Stallman has decided that changing the English language is easier than changing his own brand. A tiny, tiny amount of pragmatism really would go a long way.