0

http://kin.calvin.free.fr

Human development has many bad impacts over the world. Either concerning our environment or ourselves. As time flows, ice becomes water, water becomes black. Forests are ripped off, grounds are polluted.

Full story »
vlovindia's picture
Created by vlovindia 16 years 13 weeks ago
Category: Philosophy   Tags:
aboutblank's picture

aboutblank

16 years 13 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago

0

The freedom we refer to when

The freedom we refer to when we talk about free software allows us to control our own computers and cooperate within a community. Proprietary software does not allow us the liberty to do these things; we do not consider ourselves to be free if we choose to accept any of it. Open source philosophy places less emphasis on software freedom. Proponents of open source teaches that it is acceptable to not demand freedom if it is convenient to do so.

crimperman's picture

crimperman

16 years 13 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago

0

Save yourself the bother

This phrase sums up this article:
"Concerning the finality, Open Source and Free Software allows a user to be free. And Open source will take over Free Software because much more efficient economically."
So the premise of the whole piece is that OSS will succeed over free software because businesses "like" OSS. Neatly missing the point that "open source" is not much more than a marketing term for free software.

"Isn’t a user freer to install and use much more programs on SuSE Linux (Open Source) than on Debian Linux (Free Sofware) ? Couldn’t SuSE be freer because easier to use ? Isn’t a user freer to work on MS applications on Windows (closed) than on Linux (FLOSS) ? The answer is yes, even so the reason is clear."
Apart from the myth that SuSE is easier to use, this is just plain wrong. Freedom is not necessarily related to ease of use. Ease of use is perception-based, freedom is not. You may perceive you have freedom of speech but in certain countries you do not have it. Similarly you may think you do not are free to distribute a copy of Microsoft Office - you are not (unless you have a licence to do so). A user may find a certain application easier to use but that does not mean they are free to do what they want with what it produces.
Example?: A friend of mine is a music teacher, he composes and arranges music as well. DRM restricted hardware and software is starting to prevent him from transferring copies of his _own_ works from home to his workplace. Why did he use those tools to create the works? Because they were "easy to use".

Kin Calvin's picture

Kin Calvin

16 years 13 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago

0

Freedom(s)

Hi Ryan,
"Freedom is not necessarily related to ease of us"
If a user in unable to use a software, there is no software. So even if this software is Free, Freedom will not be brought to user.

Anyhow, I do understand the sence of Free Software, we are talking about Freedom of viewing the code, diffusing. This article does mistunderstand Free Software.

But what kind of Freedom the public is looking for ?
I am not telling what I would like see happening (what could be future); I am telling what is happening (the path future is taking) :
- First, users do not no how to read code, so free code will never interest them.
- Second, users do not care about laws, either a software is free or not, they can read it and diffuse it. Lets take an example: Some GNU/Linux distributions are Free Software and with no cost, but they can get Windows for free too, that's what they see.

I know it is a serious issue, I agree proprietary do not bring freedom to user. But how can you bring freedom to somebody that do not know what Freedom is.

aboutblank's picture

aboutblank

16 years 13 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago

0

> If a user in unable to use

> If a user in unable to use a software, there is no software. So even if this software is Free, Freedom will not be brought to user.

A computer program (also known as computer software) is a set of instructions designed to make the computer do something useful. The user should demand that the program be changed if the program is no longer useful.

> First, users do not no how to read code, so free code will never interest them.

The user can hire a computer programmer to read code.

> Second, users do not care about laws, either a software is free or not, they can read it and diffuse it. Lets take an example: Some GNU/Linux distributions are Free Software and with no cost, but they can get Windows for free too, that's what they see.

That's right. They live in a world where they are not taught the ideals of free software.

> But how can you bring freedom to somebody that do not know what Freedom is.

Somebody has to teach the user what is freedom. But before we can teach freedom, we must first understand it ourselves.

Best karma users