Yes, open source is bad term to be used. It only helps corporations and big tech to wash out, it’s like osswashing.
Big tech also does open source because they are very interested in Open Source, such as Linux, the system that runs the world. Without Linux (which is open source) the world couldn’t run. All routers, servers, IoT, many devices (etc.) run Linux, Open Source.
Any closed source app that big tech or small tech do also uses Open Source tools and libraries. And you are an ignorant.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
Don’t know who is ignorant here. Open source is bad term to be used, coopted by big tech, end of story.
I get from this that whoever made this meme doesn’t like foss, but I don’t get what is it trying to say. That foss is just a way for big tech to have software for free and that it’s production is chaotic?
I actually like FOSS alot, I don’t want big tech taking it over and dictating how things should be done.
I don’t want FOSS helping out google, meta, microsoft etc. FOSS is meant for society and people not for companies to make more profit and in process of that destroying society and exploiting people.
EDIT: Just to add, I’m aginst using term open source which is taken over by comapnies and companies use it to wash themself.
Google, Meta and Microsoft are bad. But I’m good. I want to dictate who can use open-source software and how!
Uh, companies are part of society, and one of the biggest contributors to free and open source software development. If you want an example of a FOSS-only project, look at GNU Hurd, it’s a forever unfinished project because the alternative (Linux) was rocketed forward by corporations contributing patches and whatnot and thus became far more attractive.
So I guess I really don’t understand your problem with corporate contributions. They make the software better, so it’s a mutually beneficial arrangement.
If corporations didn’t get involved, FOSS would hardly be a usable replacement vs proprietary software for most people because few people actually have the time or drive to consistently develop it. Corporations do, because they need the software to satisfy their business cases, and thus are willing to invest time and money into it.
So I guess my question to you use, how does a corporation making money from something it shares with the public negatively impact you?
So I guess my question to you use, how does a corporation making money from something it shares with the public negatively impact you?
For example email,now it’s very dificult to self host email and not get caught with spam filter dictated by big tech. Entire internet really, before we had personal websites, community forums then reddit came and take over the forums making profit of off it. There are many examples. It is true that this techno landscape now is mirror image of relations we have in our society, rich getting richer and exploint poorer, in most banal sense. In linux they put/or are putting in subscription system to unlock cpu cores only if you pay, even when you bought processor.
Look around more and you can find a lot of other examples, one more is EEE(embrace, extend, extinguis) of xmpp.
People seem to appreciate companies very much, even getting glad that “great meta is using activitypub with threads and we are all gonna be happy”, in reality we won’t. They will just co-opt fediverse and EEE it.
Me personally am on most FOSS hardvare and software I can be on this moment. If I find time to make feaseble to use more FOSS stuff and get away from all the corpos I will do that for sure. But only me, and small ammount of people going that way is not the solution. It has to be mass movement to ditch the corpos once and for all.
Go ahead and AGPL, or something.
I appreciate you sharing your perspective. There is some element of truth. Projects like VS-Code and Chromium are examples of what you are getting at. These are Open Source projects, not to be confused with Free (as in freedom) Software.
To learn the difference, you should read more about licenses. Specifically the differences between permissive and non-permissive licenses and the difference between copyright and strong copy left.
Just to clarify, this post is not meant to glorify startups! Startups also have CEO and it’s same as first line in the meme.
This post is meant to start a discussion and to highlight the effects big tech having on FOSS.
It’s aginst big tech not aginst FOSS!
I’m with you. I find it really problematic how involved massive corporations are with software that ostensibly belong to the people. Whether that’s in terms of dictating development paths, charging fees for SWAS or whatever they call it these days, to outright stealing it and charging money for its simple use.
