06-25-2016, 10:50 AM | #31 | |
cacoethes scribendi
Posts: 5,812
Karma: 137770742
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Device: Kobo Aura One & H2Ov2, Sony PRS-650
|
Quote:
If you really want to keep it simple, just say it like it is: "here is some free software that I use and trust." |
|
06-25-2016, 11:18 AM | #32 | |
Wizard
Posts: 1,035
Karma: 12018368
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Canada
Device: Sony PRS-650, Kobo Clara
|
Quote:
|
|
Advert | |
|
06-25-2016, 01:18 PM | #33 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 11,309
Karma: 43993832
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monroe Wisconsin
Device: K3, Kindle Paperwhite, Calibre, and Mobipocket for Pc (netbook)
|
Quote:
What you're talking about is the idea of the program being easy to use. Is it basic with no complicated add ons. |
|
06-25-2016, 01:28 PM | #34 | |
Wizard
Posts: 1,035
Karma: 12018368
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Canada
Device: Sony PRS-650, Kobo Clara
|
Quote:
That dictionary reference seems to have several variations on several meanings for the word. I don't see how it contradicts me. |
|
06-26-2016, 04:22 AM | #35 | |
cacoethes scribendi
Posts: 5,812
Karma: 137770742
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Device: Kobo Aura One & H2Ov2, Sony PRS-650
|
Quote:
I know of the "free as in beer" vs "free as in speech" distinction (for those that do not, see: this link.) But free-as-in-speech is mostly* a software developer concern. The point I am really trying to make is that these distinctions don't actually mean anything to most end-users. Most end users want:
For many users, free-as-in-beer looks attractive. Very few are going to look bother looking at the licence conditions in sufficient detail to understand that the software was developed according to free-as-in-speech principles - that aspect simply doesn't come into at all for normal end-user use of most software. If you want confirmation of this problem, just look at Facebook and similar "free" services. The users of Facebook et al are the product that Facebook and friends sell to the real clients, those that pay money for advertising etc.. And yet we have millions upon millions of people willing to offer themselves (freely!) as product, just to access these "free" services. However much software developers might like end-users to care about the conditions under which the software was developed, it isn't going to happen. It's hard enough trying to stop people buying products manufactured in sweatshops or using/harming endangered species; it would be a very very hard sell to start getting the general public to care about the problems of software development. (Oh, those poor little geeks, slaving away in their basements, OD'ing on coffee and pastries.) * Yes, there are "freedom" aspects potentially affecting end users too (eg: what devices they can run the software on). But as noted above, as long as the software runs on the device they are using now most users will be happy. So much software has such a short lifespan these days that worrying about whether it will run on what you have next year is often a waste of effort. Last edited by gmw; 06-26-2016 at 04:25 AM. |
|
Advert | |
|
06-26-2016, 11:27 AM | #36 | |
Wizard
Posts: 1,035
Karma: 12018368
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Canada
Device: Sony PRS-650, Kobo Clara
|
Quote:
You went on to demonstrate that most users are ignorant and apathetic, attributing to them shallow and venal motivations. And you make an appeal to pragmatism. This is all irrelevant to the principle of freedom. Software freedom is primarily about the user's freedom. I can see that you have a grasp of the "free as in beer" vs "free as in speech" distinction. It's just that you don't get that software freedom is primarily about the user's freedom. |
|
06-26-2016, 12:09 PM | #37 | |
cacoethes scribendi
Posts: 5,812
Karma: 137770742
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Device: Kobo Aura One & H2Ov2, Sony PRS-650
|
Quote:
There is nothing venal or apathetic about not caring how some particular thing works. There is far too much technology in our lives these days for it to be practical to be familiar with the ins and outs of everything we interact with. I used to tune my own car, but I wouldn't try it these days. I currently have our washing machine in for repair because I don't want learn how to fix it for myself. I have other things to do (like continue probably pointless discussions on here ). |
|
06-26-2016, 03:16 PM | #38 | |
Wizard
Posts: 1,035
Karma: 12018368
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Canada
Device: Sony PRS-650, Kobo Clara
|
Quote:
Whether you work on your car or your washing machine is irrelevant to software freedom, except in the cases where unfree software prevents you. It certainly means nothing to my preference for free software over freeware, does it? |
|
06-27-2016, 06:11 AM | #39 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 45,004
Karma: 55647515
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Peru
Device: Kindle: Oasis 3, Voyage WiFi; Kobo: Libra 2, Aura One
|
Moderator Notice
Just a reminder, before this MIGHT get any worse: Keep 'freedom' - as political discourse - out of the equation. Everyone here knows the danger of this issue, and everyone here knows exactly where the P&R forum is located. And I am convinced that everyone is going to be very, very courteous to one another and avoid snide comments and personal attacks....because that's the way we are. |
06-27-2016, 12:37 PM | #40 |
Wizard
Posts: 1,035
Karma: 12018368
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Canada
Device: Sony PRS-650, Kobo Clara
|
I think we've all been calm and courteous throughout, and I'm sure that any talk of freedom will continue to be about software and not politics.
|
06-27-2016, 05:29 PM | #41 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 45,004
Karma: 55647515
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Peru
Device: Kindle: Oasis 3, Voyage WiFi; Kobo: Libra 2, Aura One
|
|
06-27-2016, 11:06 PM | #42 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 11,309
Karma: 43993832
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monroe Wisconsin
Device: K3, Kindle Paperwhite, Calibre, and Mobipocket for Pc (netbook)
|
I agree that there is no need for the topic to become heated or for rancor to enter into things. That's what the politics/religion forum is for.
|
06-28-2016, 10:44 AM | #43 | |
cacoethes scribendi
Posts: 5,812
Karma: 137770742
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Device: Kobo Aura One & H2Ov2, Sony PRS-650
|
Quote:
There are lots of different freedoms involved in software (and I am still talking about software - no politics, and no religion - I promise. ... At least, no more than perhaps the sort of religious fervour that sometimes comes into such discussions ). The sort of free software you have been alluding to generally follows the so called "copyleft" principle (any changes you make to it must be made available under the same conditions). While I think this principle was probably necessary for open source grow to a force in its own right, the very lack of freedom that this principle imposed constrained the growth of open source for some time. Whether people like it or not, the software industry is heavily dependent on corporate support, and copyleft doesn't fit easily into most corporate requirements. Eventually someone came up with the bright idea of dual licensing, and this opened up the way for the source code of many more projects to see the light of day. That is: Freedom is sometimes in the eye of the beholder. What rules you use to choose the software you want to use is, of course, entirely up to you. But if you are not a software developer then my opinion is there is not much advantage in choosing strictly free-as-in-speech software. Most free-as-in-beer software has as much freedom as most users need or want. Indeed, a lot of free-as-in-beer software these days will have been developed using - at least partly - the same source as a lot of free-as-in-speech software, but under alternate licensing. The same precautions in software selection are required by users in any case. None of which is trying to argue that free-as-in-speech software is a bad thing. I think its rise has been very good thing for the industry, and this is a very good thing for all users: so much more to choose from, and much of it very much higher quality than it would have been otherwise. I just think it's a mistake to see it as the only way to get good software. |
|
06-28-2016, 01:55 PM | #44 | |
Wizard
Posts: 1,035
Karma: 12018368
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Canada
Device: Sony PRS-650, Kobo Clara
|
Quote:
I take your word for it that you weren't implying that some users (most users in your comments) are apathetic about software freedom, or choose free software for venal reasons. The software freedom I'm talking about is the user's freedom, not the specific GPL requirement that derivatives have to be licensed in the same way. (although that requirement is intended to ensure the same freedom to subsequent users.) I agree that the watered down requirements of Open Source made it easier for timid business people to get involved. Many of the variations on licensing allow them to take someone else's work for free and turn it into something proprietary. Minimum investment for maximum gain is enough incentive for some of them to overcome their timidity about it. I agree that freedom can be in the eye of the beholder and, as you've shown, some find it in the freedom to make money from other people's work. And I do understand their reluctance to reciprocate by contributing freely. I can imagine their revulsion at the prospect, since it violates what they believe in. The soft freedom of open source attracted pecuniary interest and raised the profile of quasi-free software. The ultimate effect on software freedom is still unknown. My "rules" for choosing software are a combination of pragmatism and principle. Pragmatically, freeware can be dangerous. I shouldn't have to elaborate on that. I hear it's a source of malware and nagware and unwanted "accessories." It's likely that you know more about it than I do, though. More importantly, I believe in living by my principles as much as possible, and I like the principles of free software. It's the same principle that has me releasing my novels under Creative Commons licenses. I would love the poetic symmetry of the authors of the free software that I use finding and reading the CC books that I write. You needn't continue telling me that most people don't care about these principles. I do, and whether some freeware is "just as good" simply isn't the point for me. I don't know if you mistook something I said, or if you're addressing a general audience rather than just me, but it would be a mistake to assume that I think that free software is the only way to get good software. I just prefer free software over freeware, and I have not found any instance where I have had to resort to proprietary software instead of free software. |
|
06-28-2016, 10:11 PM | #45 | |
cacoethes scribendi
Posts: 5,812
Karma: 137770742
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Device: Kobo Aura One & H2Ov2, Sony PRS-650
|
Quote:
Software developers have to make a living too. The idealist stance is that they should make their money through support and similar services - and many do exactly that. A more pragmatic view understands that it is not always that simple. If a company or individual wants to build some software using a combination of libraries (most significant software uses many different source code libraries), the copyleft principle can restrict their choices. They may have to select library X for practical reasons (the hardware they are working with, lack of other choices and so on), and if library X is not open source with exactly the right licence conditions then they may have to exclude copyleft libraries for other parts - no matter how much they would like to support those efforts. In such instances all sides suffer: the copyleft libraries lose a potentially valuable participant; the developer is forced to choose from other, possibly lesser, third party libraries; the users may suffer from lower quality software. And that's just one situation, there are others. Sure, some companies do free-load off others work, but the practicalities of software development mean that most end up contributing back to the open source in various ways. Even just having extra users reporting bugs can be a significant help, and having extra developers brought into familiarity with the source can offer long term gains to the project. And it gets better. The more people and companies become involved with open source the more the advantages of it become apparent and the more source is opened up. I think people are slowly coming to realise that they don't actually lose anything due to free-loaders. At worst they are irrelevant, at best they become participants over time. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Majuscule et mots composé | neufsix | Assistance | 13 | 12-26-2021 05:08 PM |
Are you using LibreOffice 4.4? | Pinkie | Writers' Corner | 16 | 08-24-2015 06:28 PM |
anybody using LibreOffice to compose? | Gregg Bell | Writers' Corner | 80 | 08-22-2015 12:23 AM |
Help to compose a regex to find strings, enclosed in comments tags | Vadim777 | Conversion | 5 | 04-17-2012 12:49 PM |