Futo, Please don't attempt to create your own Open Source Definition · Danb Blog
Futo, Please don't attempt to create your own Open Source Definition · Danb Blog
You're viewing a single thread.
If you feel that “open source”, as per the OSD, has to change, I’d ask why does it need to change instead of you using an alternative term
Simple: OSI doesn't own the word "open source", nor should they. Their definition is as blue eyed and naive as Marxism. It doesn't evolve nor live in the real world, but a one of fantasy where no method of exploitation nor circumvention has been invented. It's basically a world where lying hasn't been invented.
In our real world with real consequences and real people, companies take advantage of opensource. The vast majority of open source maintainers and authors can't live on open source. Yet somehow the privileged few that can, would like to make everyone believe that principles pay off, and that living by some definition made by the privileged is the only " right way" to make a living writing opensource.
I find it to be nearly in the same vein as rich people who say "if you work hard enough, you can be rich like me" and throw around platitudes like "pull yourself up from your bootstraps". Or being like those in an ivory tower judging those trying to find a way to make a living: " no, not like that! only my way is just".
Maybe if you paid more attention to the original definitions of words you would know what marxism is
Maybe learn to read what people write first? I didn't define Marxism.
In futos case the problem isn't that their license doesn't meet the OSI's definition of open source, but that the license is just garbage, like their non modification clause or their litigation clause.
What a jerk. It is because of people like you that true values and fair principles of open source and libre softwares are not understood and boosted by people. Your comment make you be considered as an enemy of FLOSS principles.
If you disagree with that, feel free to embrace all that shit of “post open source” ; libertarian and capitalism people like you will enjoy it.
Open source definition by OSI: https://opensource.org/osd
Free / libre definition by FSF: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html
Case in point.
What we have here folks is what I referred to before as a purity testing asshole. Unfortunately, open source is full of them. Most of them aren't even developers. It's pathetic
Per our Code of Conduct, please avoid insulting users when commenting on our instance, even if "they started it".
Though I agree with the point you're making (purists and pedants are unhelpful), IMO there's no need to stoop to their level and attack them.
You are definitely right though. The open source community is full of these people unwilling to change, which is ironic given how vehemently they request others to change and accept open source. It's nigh dogmatic, which I think is problematic.
🤡