Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 11:14:37 -0800 From: "Jeremiah Gowdy" <jgowdy@home.com> To: "Jonas Luster" <loki@smurftarget.net>, <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: ONTOPIC - FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT - Not a bunch of licence Jihad crap Message-ID: <000f01c078de$14478c40$aa240018@cx443070b> References: <200101070509.f0759uw74992@green.dyndns.org> <001801c0786c$e5d55b60$aa240018@cx443070b> <20010107001846.A42548@netwarriors.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Claiming that software isn't "free" because it's not valuable is redefining > > the word "free" to mean something that has no cost, yet has value. > > > > free (fr) adj. Costing nothing; gratuitous: > > Yeah, and 'gay' means 'joyful'. You're saying the most common definition of "free" isn't no cost ? > > software, and that's a pretty damned closed minded point of view. I've > > written hundreds of DOS and Windows applications, which are FREE, although I > > didn't include the source code with them. Your massive generalization that > > So they are 'free' to modify, 'free' to distribute, 'free' to look into? > Maybe I'm missing something here, but despite not being an English > major, I seem to recognize the word 'free' in 'freedom'. What does a > programmer gain from mislabeling his products? Freeware != free > software, not just because 'free' is more than just 'free beer'. Mislabeling products ? Who the hell are you to decide what the term free software means ? If someone says, free beer, free bread, free hats, or free software, they mean the item is *free*. You can't have beer that's "more free". There's already a word for the kind of "free" software you people are talking about. Open source. > > > you can't start redefining words like "free" to push your rabid open source > > agenda. The people of the past who contributed their software to the scene > > in the form of public domain, freeware, and shareware were writing code in > > the same spirit as those of us who write open source code today. So why > > No. While (with the exception of 'Shareware' to a certain point), > Freeware is a gift, 'free software' is more than that. It is a 'call to > participate', to 'evaluate', to learn. One cannot learn much from closed > source, no matter how much the author charges for its use. Oh, so now the word free means the following: 'no cost' 'has value' 'call to participate' 'call to evaluate' 'call to learn' 'open source'. That's quite alot of meaning you're putting in that word. Don't we already have a term to describe such software rather than such an ambigous term as "free software" ? Open source. > 'Free', for me and for a lot of people out there, means my freedom to > extend my horizon by looking inside the program. My freedom to enhance > and contribute, my freedom to borrow and my freedom to give. This is > freedom, this is what 'free software' is all about. So you're going to annex those words and demand that everyone accept your meaning of the words, rather than using the preexisting term, open source. > I guess this is a thread that should not be here and I apologize for > adding my $0.02 to it, even though I know it's wrong, but I am one of > these 'open source jihad bullshit assholes' and I don't like it if > someone belittles the efforts of my fellow coders out there. Who's belittling who ? You're saying my free software can't be called free software because it's not open source. I've been writing free software for 11 fucking years, so don't tell me my software is not free software, just because it's not open source software. Get your terms straight and take your open source jihad elsewhere. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000f01c078de$14478c40$aa240018>