Hi all,
I'm pleased to see the announcement of the coming FSFE summit
https://fsfe.org/community/events/2016/summit/frontpage.en.html
it's an exciting schedule and I hope I'll be able to attend.
However, and I really don't intend to start any prolonged "editor wars" or otherwise engage in lengthy hairsplitting, but a part of me is also unhappy to see the term "open source" featuring so prominently in an event sponsored by the FSFE. I do believe RMS is right in his reasons to reject the term, one of them being that it is kind of a "business-friendly" way of avoiding the issue of freedom.
We should not endorse the avoidance of the issue of freedom, are my thoughts. This should, in my conception, be a defining difference between an event like this, organized by the FSFE, and a conference such as FOSDEM, whose aim is more general.
Best, Carsten
On 11/07/16 11:27, Carsten Agger wrote:
Hi all,
I'm pleased to see the announcement of the coming FSFE summit
https://fsfe.org/community/events/2016/summit/frontpage.en.html
it's an exciting schedule and I hope I'll be able to attend.
However, and I really don't intend to start any prolonged "editor wars" or otherwise engage in lengthy hairsplitting, but a part of me is also unhappy to see the term "open source" featuring so prominently in an event sponsored by the FSFE. I do believe RMS is right in his reasons to reject the term, one of them being that it is kind of a "business-friendly" way of avoiding the issue of freedom.
We should not endorse the avoidance of the issue of freedom, are my thoughts. This should, in my conception, be a defining difference between an event like this, organized by the FSFE, and a conference such as FOSDEM, whose aim is more general.
How do you feel about using the more verbose "free and open source software"?
Sadly, the term "free" is often misused and the wider public is not always aware what we are talking about.
On 11.07.2016 12:39, Daniel Pocock wrote:
On 11/07/16 11:27, Carsten Agger wrote:
unhappy to see the term "open source" featuring so prominently in an event sponsored by the FSFE. I do believe RMS is right in his reasons to reject the term, one of them being that it is kind of a "business-friendly" way of avoiding the issue of freedom.
I was surprised myself and I agree with Carsten.
We should not endorse the avoidance of the issue of freedom, are my thoughts. This should, in my conception, be a defining difference between an event like this, organized by the FSFE, and a conference such as FOSDEM, whose aim is more general.
How do you feel about using the more verbose "free and open source software"?
Sadly, the term "free" is often misused and the wider public is not always aware what we are talking about.
We can always use "libre software" if the target audience is not educated. But being a _summit_, I believe the target are us, free software activists and developers.
Tiberiu
# Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic [Juli 11, 2016 11:44 ]:
On 11.07.2016 12:39, Daniel Pocock wrote:
On 11/07/16 11:27, Carsten Agger wrote:
unhappy to see the term "open source" featuring so prominently in an event sponsored by the FSFE. I do believe RMS is right in his reasons to reject the term, one of them being that it is kind of a "business-friendly" way of avoiding the issue of freedom.
I was surprised myself and I agree with Carsten.
I agree that especially on the first day (focussed on business related talks) there's quite a lot "Open Source". But in contrast to FSF, the FSFE does not oppose the term OS in general but understands it as a synonym for Free Software [1]. In some business worlds it seems OS is a better marketing word than Free Software, and in my opinion we should not focus on forcing them to use FS instead against their will, but make clear that both terms mean the same thing.
Of course FSFE on their own should state that FS is the better term because it focuses on freedom instead of "just" openness. But we should not blink the fact that some external speakers may feel differently. Let's propagate the similarities instead of the differences instead.
Just my own pragmatic 2-cents :)
Best, Max
[1] https://fsfe.org/freesoftware/basics/comparison.html
Den 11-07-2016 kl. 11:39 skrev Daniel Pocock:
How do you feel about using the more verbose "free and open source software"?
I like that better and often use it myself as a kind of compromise.
Sadly, the term "free" is often misused and the wider public is not always aware what we are talking about.
However, that is a problem which might be better solved by education.
A couple of years ago, when I visited Brazil for the first time (I've been there only twice, so don't want to sound too well-travelled) I was very pleasantly surprised that ordinary people, i.e. non-technical social activists, immediately understood what I meant when I said I was working with "free software" without me having to explain.
That's because the Lula government and the Ministry of Culture under Gilberto Gil did *a lot* to promote the concept and to promote the idea of community-created and -used software, not least among the social movements.
Free software has not, of course, won a convincing victory in Brazil, but it just goes to show that it *is* possible.
Best Carsten
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Carsten Agger agger@modspil.dk wrote:
Den 11-07-2016 kl. 11:39 skrev Daniel Pocock:
How do you feel about using the more verbose "free and open source software"?
I like that better and often use it myself as a kind of compromise.
I am not really sure if that verbose is appropriate, even though I'd love to use myself. It all depends on the relationship/connection between FSFE and FSF. Because FSF would never like the idea nor approve the usage of the verbose open source, or better, Stallman would never approve knowing him:-)
Personally I think we should break this ice between Free Software and Open Source as to me they are nothing else but father and child to each other.
Sadly, the term "free" is often misused and the wider public is not
always aware what we are talking about.
However, that is a problem which might be better solved by education.
A couple of years ago, when I visited Brazil for the first time (I've been there only twice, so don't want to sound too well-travelled) I was very pleasantly surprised that ordinary people, i.e. non-technical social activists, immediately understood what I meant when I said I was working with "free software" without me having to explain.
That's because the Lula government and the Ministry of Culture under Gilberto Gil did *a lot* to promote the concept and to promote the idea of community-created and -used software, not least among the social movements.
Free software has not, of course, won a convincing victory in Brazil, but it just goes to show that it *is* possible.
I can confirm this as I was part of a massive group who were engaged by Brazilian government at that time (2006) to setup government IT infrastructure (i.e. government institutions, schools, etc.), where Gilberto Gil dispatched his staff all over Europe to get people who can help in doing that.
So it is a great example indeed and the only country that fully engaged on Free Software.
Best Carsten
Discussion mailing list Discussion@fsfeurope.org https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
On 11/07/16 15:26, Stefan Umit Uygur wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Carsten Agger <agger@modspil.dk mailto:agger@modspil.dk> wrote:
Den 11-07-2016 kl. 11:39 skrev Daniel Pocock: How do you feel about using the more verbose "free and open source software"? I like that better and often use it myself as a kind of compromise.I am not really sure if that verbose is appropriate, even though I'd love to use myself. It all depends on the relationship/connection between FSFE and FSF. Because FSF would never like the idea nor approve the usage of the verbose open source, or better, Stallman would never approve knowing him:-)
Personally I think we should break this ice between Free Software and Open Source as to me they are nothing else but father and child to each other.
Sadly, the term "free" is often misused and the wider public is not always aware what we are talking about. However, that is a problem which might be better solved by education. A couple of years ago, when I visited Brazil for the first time (I've been there only twice, so don't want to sound too well-travelled) I was very pleasantly surprised that ordinary people, i.e. non-technical social activists, immediately understood what I meant when I said I was working with "free software" without me having to explain. That's because the Lula government and the Ministry of Culture under Gilberto Gil did *a lot* to promote the concept and to promote the idea of community-created and -used software, not least among the social movements. Free software has not, of course, won a convincing victory in Brazil, but it just goes to show that it *is* possible.I can confirm this as I was part of a massive group who were engaged by Brazilian government at that time (2006) to setup government IT infrastructure (i.e. government institutions, schools, etc.), where Gilberto Gil dispatched his staff all over Europe to get people who can help in doing that.
So it is a great example indeed and the only country that fully engaged on Free Software.
Does Portugese have distinct words for "free of charge" and "free as in liberty", like French and Spanish? If so, that is possibly just as significant as the education factor.
You mean free as free beer and free as freedom:-)
I wouldn't know as I don't know portuguese, but I can talk for Italian which has 2 distinct words. Knowing that portuguese is latin derivative I'd expect that to be distinct as well.
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Daniel Pocock daniel@pocock.pro wrote:
On 11/07/16 15:26, Stefan Umit Uygur wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Carsten Agger <agger@modspil.dk mailto:agger@modspil.dk> wrote:
Den 11-07-2016 kl. 11:39 skrev Daniel Pocock: How do you feel about using the more verbose "free and opensource
software"? I like that better and often use it myself as a kind of compromise.I am not really sure if that verbose is appropriate, even though I'd love to use myself. It all depends on the relationship/connection between FSFE and FSF. Because FSF would never like the idea nor approve the usage of the verbose open source, or better, Stallman would never approve knowing him:-)
Personally I think we should break this ice between Free Software and Open Source as to me they are nothing else but father and child to each other.
Sadly, the term "free" is often misused and the wider public isnot
always aware what we are talking about. However, that is a problem which might be better solved by education. A couple of years ago, when I visited Brazil for the first time (I've been there only twice, so don't want to sound too well-travelled) I was very pleasantly surprised that ordinary people, i.e. non-technical social activists, immediately understood what I meant when I said I was working with "free software" without me having to explain. That's because the Lula government and the Ministry of Culture under Gilberto Gil did *a lot* to promote the concept and to promote the idea of community-created and -used software, not least among the social movements. Free software has not, of course, won a convincing victory in Brazil, but it just goes to show that it *is* possible.I can confirm this as I was part of a massive group who were engaged by Brazilian government at that time (2006) to setup government IT infrastructure (i.e. government institutions, schools, etc.), where Gilberto Gil dispatched his staff all over Europe to get people who can help in doing that.
So it is a great example indeed and the only country that fully engaged on Free Software.
Does Portugese have distinct words for "free of charge" and "free as in liberty", like French and Spanish? If so, that is possibly just as significant as the education factor.
Discussion mailing list Discussion@fsfeurope.org https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Den 11-07-2016 kl. 15:37 skrev Daniel Pocock:
Does Portugese have distinct words for "free of charge" and "free as in liberty", like French and Spanish? If so, that is possibly just as significant as the education factor.
As Spanish, French, Italian and German Portuguese indeed also uses two words for these concepts.
But, in English you also have free speech etc.
On 11.07.2016 15:55, Reinhard Müller wrote:
Am 2016-07-11 um 15:53 schrieb Carsten Agger:
As Spanish, French, Italian and German Portuguese indeed also uses two words for these concepts.
FWIW, German doesn't. It's "frei" for both.
Thanks,
I disagree here. The german word "frei" is more like in free speech than in free beer. Although there are exceptions like Freibier or Freikarten, I think you normally would use "umsonst" or "kostenlos" for something free of charge. At least this is my feeling as a native speaker.
Regards, David
On 11/07/16 15:53, Carsten Agger wrote:
Den 11-07-2016 kl. 15:37 skrev Daniel Pocock:
Does Portugese have distinct words for "free of charge" and "free as in liberty", like French and Spanish? If so, that is possibly just as significant as the education factor.
As Spanish, French, Italian and German Portuguese indeed also uses two words for these concepts.
But, in English you also have free speech etc.
It depends a lot on context
Most people are offered "free" apps for their phones every time they visit a web site now although these apps don't protect the user's freedom in any way. Look for Skype or WhatsApp in Google Play and see what I mean, they all have "Free" written next to them.
So not only are users unaware of the alternative meaning of "free" in the context of software, some more perceptive users assume something is not in their best interests when an app is offered to them "free"
Den 11-07-2016 kl. 15:58 skrev Daniel Pocock:
So not only are users unaware of the alternative meaning of "free" in the context of software, some more perceptive users assume something is not in their best interests when an app is offered to them "free"
I think that's really mainly a question of education. Ideally, people should be learning about the meaning and history of the GPL in secondary school, and the distinction between free and proprietary software should be common knowledge.
I think that's a better way to go than to use different words - especially since even if we only ever did use the term "open source", it would still be necessary to educate people about it for them to grasp the idea behind e.g. the GPL.
As different words go, I think that the term "open source" (and this may also serve as a response to Max) is particularly vicious as it tends to gloss over the political points and is specifically intended to do so. So I'd never use it "stand-alone". I can accept the abbreviation FOSS and its verbose form, though, and will use it where people might not understand what I mean with "free software".
Yes we have two different words for "free": - grátis: without payment, usually related to freeware and also when you buy a product and you pay for 2 and get another one "grátis". - livre: without barriers, like free as a penguim.
Gratis is also used in the Netherland and Belgium.
Cheers,
Mauricio
Op 2016-07-11 15:37, schreef Daniel Pocock:
On 11/07/16 15:26, Stefan Umit Uygur wrote:
Does Portugese have distinct words for "free of charge" and "free as in liberty", like French and Spanish? If so, that is possibly just as significant as the education factor.
Discussion mailing list Discussion@fsfeurope.org https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Hi Carsten,
On 11.07.2016 11:27, Carsten Agger wrote:
I'm pleased to see the announcement of the coming FSFE summit
https://fsfe.org/community/events/2016/summit/frontpage.en.html
it's an exciting schedule and I hope I'll be able to attend.
thank you and I hope as well to see you at the summit
However, and I really don't intend to start any prolonged "editor wars" or otherwise engage in lengthy hairsplitting, but a part of me is also unhappy to see the term "open source" featuring so prominently in an event sponsored by the FSFE. I do believe RMS is right in his reasons to reject the term, one of them being that it is kind of a "business-friendly" way of avoiding the issue of freedom.
We should not endorse the avoidance of the issue of freedom, are my thoughts. This should, in my conception, be a defining difference between an event like this, organized by the FSFE, and a conference such as FOSDEM, whose aim is more general.
Thank you for bringing this up and yes, I can understand your thoughts. As I am the organiser and author behind I take the blame on me.
Please let me explain my thoughts: I personally prefer and love the most "Software Libre". This is Spanish and there is no ambiguity with gratis/free, what makes it very easy to understand for everyone. Unfortunately, most people in the world speak English and not Spanish, so that term does not help so much as not so many understand it. Therefore, my choice is "Free Software" because I like to highlight the 4 Freedoms.
Now if you take a 2nd look on the summit pages you will see that there is 100% use of Free Software and not a single "Open Source". You only find "Open Source" in the titles of the talks from external speakers (and just in 4 talks of approximately 70 talks). But this was their choice not mine or the choice from FSFE.
Yes, I could have asked them to change their titles. Or I could have even forced them to change their title. But is this helpful? Who am I or the FSFE to tell for example Peter Ganten, the chairman of the Open Source Business Alliance, to not say Open Source? If I put myself in his place, I mean how would you feel if you are invited and you would be told that you can only give your presentation if you say "Open Source"?
Both way, I do not think this is helpful. I like the summit to be an event where we cooperate and find networks and in that we grow our Free Software movement. And for me, even Open Source is part of the Free Software family. And although I will not use it myself, who am I to force others not to use it?
That is why I decided: The summit will be 100% Free Software but I will not force anyone to not use another term - is it Open Source or Software Libre.
Best regards and looking forward, Erik
Hei Erik
Den 12-07-2016 kl. 09:54 skrev Erik Albers:
Now if you take a 2nd look on the summit pages you will see that there is 100% use of Free Software and not a single "Open Source". You only find "Open Source" in the titles of the talks from external speakers (and just in 4 talks of approximately 70 talks). But this was their choice not mine or the choice from FSFE.
[...]
I like the summit to be an event where we cooperate and find networks and in that we grow our Free Software movement. And for me, even Open Source is part of the Free Software family. And although I will not use it myself, who am I to force others not to use it?
That is why I decided: The summit will be 100% Free Software but I will not force anyone to not use another term - is it Open Source or Software Libre.
Thanks for the explanation, I see your point about letting people choose their own language!
Best Carsten
On 12/07/16 09:59, Carsten Agger wrote:
Hei Erik
Den 12-07-2016 kl. 09:54 skrev Erik Albers:
Now if you take a 2nd look on the summit pages you will see that there is 100% use of Free Software and not a single "Open Source". You only find "Open Source" in the titles of the talks from external speakers (and just in 4 talks of approximately 70 talks). But this was their choice not mine or the choice from FSFE.
[...]
I like the summit to be an event where we cooperate and find networks and in that we grow our Free Software movement. And for me, even Open Source is part of the Free Software family. And although I will not use it myself, who am I to force others not to use it?
That is why I decided: The summit will be 100% Free Software but I will not force anyone to not use another term - is it Open Source or Software Libre.
Thanks for the explanation, I see your point about letting people choose their own language!
Yes, that is something that comes to my mind every time this is discussed, there is something potentially non-free about telling people what they can or can't say