this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
374 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

59597 readers
3518 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
374
Why do all these companies developing privatised software use the word "Open"? Real question. (lemmy.cat)
submitted 1 year ago by retiolus@lemmy.cat to c/technology@lemmy.world
67 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
  • OpenAI
  • OpenText
  • OpenVMS
  • OpenServer
  • OpenEdge
  • OpenDrive
  • etc.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MHLoppy@fedia.io 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You seem to be using the term "open source" for what is instead commonly called "source-available", which has a distinct meaning from open source.

[Source-available software] includes arrangements where the source can be viewed, and in some cases modified, but without necessarily meeting the criteria to be called open-source.

[Open-source software] is released under a license in which the copyright holder grants users the rights to use, study, change, and distribute the software and its source code to anyone and for any purpose.

edit: fixed duplicated phrasing

[–] gloriousspearfish@feddit.dk 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No I am using the term for how it was originally used, back in the free software movement days in the 70s and 80s.

Open source means nothing more than the source beeing open for all to see. What your are describing we called Free Software or later FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) but the open source part is redundant in that acronym.

Also some started using Libre instead of Free, as Free sometimes are confused with Gratis. That is where the expression Free as in Freedom cones from.

[–] MHLoppy@fedia.io 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Fair enough. I suppose the terminology has evolved somewhat with time, and I can't say I have much insight into a time period from before I was born.

[–] gloriousspearfish@feddit.dk -1 points 1 year ago

It has evolved of cause. One of the sources you referred to, the OSI, has a clear agenda to define the term open source software according to their own definition. They are advocating that we use the term in the more narrow sense as you described, rather than the more original broad sense.

The Wikipedia article basically just cites OSIs definition. If you dig into the talk page on Wikipedia it is clearly a disbuted definition that is currently written.

While I absolutely am a proponent of free, libre or open source software, no matter what we call it, the narrow definition OSI suggests of open source software is still not how most people understand the term.

Narrowing the term open source software the way OSI proposes increases the confusion, it doesn't help.