Free software and open source philosophies differ, sometimes with radically different outcomes

[natacha]

Hello,

This thread is very interesting and it seems that a new discourse is 
developed by FSFE representatives, that is not so much shared by many 
people on this list.

Subject:
Re: Free software and open source philosophies differ, sometimes with 
radically different outcomes
From:
Heiki Lõhmus <repentinus at fsfe.org>
Date:
11/21/2017 06:55 PM

To:
discussion at lists.fsfe.org
>   My preferred term is Free Software because I believe
> individual freedom to be the highest political goal or utility and Free
> Software safeguards every individual's freedom and control over their
> devices.

As antecedently said in many posts, it clearly appears that to preserve 
individual freedom we should actively build a different social 
organization since the one we are in now is clearly based of restraining 
individual freedom by surveillance and exploitation (of human and 
natural resources). Of course I understand individual freedom as the 
freedom of every individual on the planet not only the richest, but I 
know this is not a widely shared view of individual freedom.


> I have no communitarian leanings beyond recognizing that
> cooperating in communities is a valid exercise of any individual's
> freedom of association,

Well this is quite sad to hear from someone who is is vice president of 
an important community based structure acting for free software.

> and I am decidedly pro-business as a valid
> exercise of individual freedom too.

Business as individual freedom, this is interesting viewpoint, it seems 
like a very politically oriented assertion and certainly pro-capitalist. 
Can you be a bit more precise please, as far as I know there are many 
type of businesses and a very unequal spectrum where big corporations 
develop extensive amounts of power while individuals or smaller 
organizations struggle to get important projects out.
> While I prefer the term Free Software, I also recognize that in the
> vast majority of cases contributions from people whose preferred term is
> Open Source also lead to increased individual choice and control over
> their device.

Well the issue here is not only from person to person, indeed what one 
person uses as a terminology does not really matter, nor does it allow 
to under-evaluate that persons contribution, however the term open 
source has been consciously differentiated in order to fulfill the needs 
of capitalists, resulting in many projects led by monopolistic 
corporations that certainly do not serve individual freedom. First 
obvious example,  the use that is made of android, or so many other 
things...
> This is true of contributions from large corporations too,
> and where any particular user disagrees with the corporation's
> direction, they are free to fork the project.

Seems easy indeed ... but you do not seem to acknowledge that large 
corporations have an infrastructure and revenues that others don't have.
Android was forked its a one man's project running on a negligible 
number of devices , its obviously impossible to compete.
Following the "winners takes it all " scheme, or "first come first 
served" (or other great assertions) major corporations embedded in the 
financial capitalism, have developed without direct competition, which 
makes it impossible for others to exist alongside their massive 
businesses fed by data brokerage, and many more nasty stuff.
> Less complaining and more
> use of the four freedoms would be entirely appropriate in such cases.
Which cases?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20171122/cbe7fec7/attachment.html>