Re: Truth matters when writing software and selecting leaders

[Jean Louis]

* Martin <smartin@disroot.org> [2021-03-29 13:57]:
> On 3/28/21 6:47 AM, Jean Louis wrote:
> > * shulie <shulie_release@optimum.net> [2021-03-27 21:28]:
> > > On 3/24/21 10:55 PM, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
> > > > As I understand, RMS always thought that proprietary software
> > > > companies would make some kind of large legal attack on the GNU project,
> > > > 
> > > no - this is just how the extreme left works now.  They scream until you
> > > agree with them.
> > We are here together because of free software, that is where we can
> > agree upon that we like it, promote it, it is useful, helps people,
> > preserves users freedom and control of their data.
> The problem is that everyone define the term "free software" in many
> different ways.

We speak here on this mailing list in the context of free software as
how it is defined on this hyperlink:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

> Controversial statements like
> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.en.html
> making this issue even more confusing.

It may be controversial, but it brings clarification on what is "open
source", which is vague ambiguous term, and what is free
software.

> There are many non ethical open-source licenses and obfuscated codes
> but saying that free software is better than open-source in general
> is like saying that official facebook app (binary blob available for
> free) is better than telegram app (open source client available only
> with commercial and centralized backend

>From the paragraph above, I can see you did not get the difference
between the free software and open souce. And your analogy is not
right. You mentioned price not freedom.

The word "free" in English has various definitions, in the fist
definition it is related to freedom, not price.

Free software is free as related to freedom on what users can do with
it, not related to price. In fact, you and everybody is encouraged to
sell it. People are making millions on sales of free software.

* Overview of verb free

The verb free has 11 senses (first 8 from tagged texts)
1. (6) free, liberate, release, unloose, unloosen, loose -- (grant freedom to; 
free from confinement)
2. (3) rid, free, disembarrass -- (relieve from; "Rid the house of pests")
3. (3) dislodge, free -- (remove or force out from a position; "The dentist 
dislodged the piece of food that had been stuck under my gums"; "He finally 
could free the legs of the earthquake victim who was buried in the rubble")
4. (1) exempt, relieve, free -- (grant relief or an exemption from a rule or 
requirement to; "She exempted me from the exam")
5. (1) free, release -- (make (information) available for publication; "release 
the list with the names of the prisoners")
6. (1) free, discharge -- (free from obligations or duties)
7. (1) free, disengage -- (free or remove obstruction from; "free a path across 
the cluttered floor")
8. (1) absolve, justify, free -- (let off the hook; "I absolve you from this 
responsibility")
9. release, relinquish, resign, free, give up -- (part with a possession or 
right; "I am relinquishing my bedroom to the long-term house guest"; "resign a 
claim to the throne")
10. release, free, liberate -- (release (gas or energy) as a result of a 
chemical reaction or physical decomposition)
11. unblock, unfreeze, free, release -- (make (assets) available; "release the 
holdings in the dictator's bank account")

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegram_(software)#Security ). We
> need updated, clearer and more explicit definition (not just better
> or worst intuitions) of the perfect free, open-source, secure,
> reproducible and bootstrappable hardware/software/system that could
> unite us again.

We use the word "free software" to clearly refer to freedom, we may
use words such as libre software to refer to freedom.

We do not use "open source" as that is vague term, and does not
necessarily mean "free software". The distinction is more and more
important today. Companies are publishing software under "open source"
licenses, that is not free software, that is proprietary software for
this or the other reason. Example is the Debian's non-free software
that has sources but is not free software, that is why it is called
non-free. 

> If RMS/FSF/GNU/Free Software go down now, we are defeated and we let
> > those corporations control every single citizen on this planet.

Well, RMS's one word or event or activity may influence the whole
world. That is true.

FSF is providing essential financial and technical support to various
free software distributions, at least I am so convinced, I do not have
the underlying information. It is very hard for FSF to go down for as
long as there are supporters and management that properly distribute
finances to support distribution of free software.

Now, GNU as free software, that is harder to get down, even without
the FSF, as everybody is free to replicate the GNU website, and GNU
software, but rarely some individual has resources and money enough to
do so, larger companies do have resources, there are mirros, and
organizations, there are people who have it on the DVD, and so on.

You are thinking in different direction, I am thinking more in
preservation of software.

The free software philosophy is more or there in existence, maybe we
shall all make a local mirror of the GNU website (HTML only) in case
of war, or other world wide events interrupting normal course of
action.

Jean